Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
M Ramakrishna Reddy vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 11 July, 2022
Author: Battu Devanand
Bench: Battu Devanand
1
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
WRIT PETITION NO.18096 of 2022
O R D E R:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and perused the material available on record.
2) With their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
3) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is an agriculturist and having agricultural lands in his village. He converted the paddy produce of his agricultural fields into rice and while transporting in a lorry bearing No.A.P.39 X 0234 to Chennai on 24.04.2022, the same was intercepted by the Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Tirupati and informed the same to the 3rd Respondent. As per the instructions of the 3rd Respondent, 4th Respondent seized the stock of rice along with lorry under the cover of Panchanama, dated 24.04.2022 alleging illegal transportation of PDS rice. Basing on the report of the 4th Respondent, dated 28.04.2022, the 2nd Respondent has initiated proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. The petitioner filed a petition before the 2nd Respondent, dated 28.04.2022 requesting to release the 2 seized stock. The owner of the seized vehicle also submitted a petition on 28.04.2022 before the 2nd Respondent requesting to release the seized vehicle. Considering the petition of the petitioner, the 2nd Respondent has issued an endorsement in Rc.No.B/34/2022, dated 14.05.2022 rejecting the request of the petitioner to release the seized stock. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed.
4) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the seized rice is not PDS rice and it is the agricultural produce of the petitioner's agricultural lands. The Respondents for statistical purpose seized the rice of the petitioner while it is in transportation without any basis to allege clandestine transaction.
5) The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies contends that the petitioner is purchasing PDS rice from surrounding villages at cheaper rate at Rs.8/- per kg and sells at higher rate at Rs.15/- per kg in the surrounding areas of Chennai to the Hotel owners and others. Learned Government Pleader further contends that on receipt of credible information, the inspecting authorities conducted search and seized the rice and the vehicle and initiated proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. As the rice 3 seized is having a perishable nature to pass interim disposal order, the 2nd Respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner to release the same in his favour.
6) Having heard the respective counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is an admitted fact that subsequent to the seizure of the rice and vehicle, a proceedings under Section 6A are initiated before the 2nd Respondent, who is the competent authority. The illegality and validity of the seizure has to be decided by the 2nd Respondent in 6A proceedings. This Court is not inclined to interfere into the 6A proceedings. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the latest order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Onteru Bhaskar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department and others1 in our considered opinion, it is appropriate and reasonable to direct the 2nd Respondent to release the seized stock in favour of the petitioner on imposing certain condition, to protect the interest of the Respondents, pending disposal of the 6A proceedings by modifying the endorsement of the 2nd Respondent in Rc.No.B/34/2022, dated 14.05.2022.
1 2022 SCC OnLine AP 348 4
7) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The endorsement in Rc.No.B/34/2022, dated 14.05.2022, issued by the 2nd Respondent is hereby set aside.
(ii) The 2nd Respondent shall release the rice seized pursuant to the mediators report, dated 24.04.2022, in favour of the petitioner on condition of furnishing immovable security equivalent to the value of the seized rice, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8) There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this petition shall stand closed.
______________________ JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND Dt.11.07.2022.
Note: Issue CC tomorrow.
B/o PGR 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND W.P.No.18096 of 2022 Dt.11.07.2022 PGR