Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Aitha Srikanth vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh And Others on 18 September, 2024
APHC010378172024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3311]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 19506/2024
Between:
Aitha Srikanth ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MARELLA RADHA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following order:
This Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed seeking the following relief:
"....to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actions of the respondents in not releasing the vehicle Ashok Lay Land Lorry bearing Reg. No. AP29 U 6179 despite the petitioners readiness to furnish a bank guarantee or personal bond as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and contrary to the Essential Commodities Act 1955 and orders made there under including the State Targeted Public Distribution System Control Order AP 2018 and vehicle consequently 2 direct the 2 to 4rt respondents to release the Ashok Lay Land Lorry bearing Reg. No. AP29 U 6179 forthwith pass...."
2. The case of the Writ Petitioner is briefly as follows:
The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle Ashoka Lay Land Lorry bearing Reg.No.AP29 U 6179. On 06.05.2023, the 3rd respondent seized the vehicle and implicating the driver in the Crime No.150 of 2023, Mandapeta Police Station, Mandapeta, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar Konaseema District for the offences under Section 420 IPC and 7(1) ECA of A.P. Civil Supplies Act, on the allegation that 350 bags of PDS rice totaling to 17,500 Kgs was being illegally transported in the vehicle.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was no restriction on the movement of rice as on 06.05.2023 and the offences were illegally registered. He further submitted that a representation dated 17.06.2024 was submitted by the petitioner to the 2nd respondent, but no order was passed thereon.
4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies represented that he had no written instructions.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation given by the petitioner within a week from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if the representation is pending or else the petitioner is at liberty to file the appropriate application before the 2nd respondent and on such filing, the 2nd 3 respondent shall dispose of the application within a week thereafter. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________ ___ JUSTICE B.S.BHANUMATHI Date: 18.09.2024 MH 4 THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI 50 WRIT PETITION NO: 19506/2024 Date: 18.09.2024 MH