Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
Ch.Shankaraiah vs The Vice Chairman & Managing ... on 25 September, 2012
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2012 AP 37, (2013) 1 ANDHLD 99
Author: C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
Bench: C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy
The Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.24325 of 2012 25-09-2012 Ch.Shankaraiah The Vice Chairman & Managing Director,AP.State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., Somajiguda, Hyderabad and 2 others. ^Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.T.Mahender Rao !Counsel for the respondents: Mr.A.Ravinder Reddy, SC for APSCSC Ltd.
<Gist:
>Head Note:
?Cases referred:NIL Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to set aside proceeding No.PDS
2 / Movt. / FG 5(13) / 1878 / 2012-13, dated 01-08-2012, of respondent No.1.
I have heard Mr.T.Mahender Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr.A.Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, representing the respondents.
The petitioner is a Stage- I Transport Contractor for Adilabad District and he has been operating the Stage- I contract under work order issued on 10- 05-2012 and agreement issued on 02-05-2012. The petitioner's function as Stage- I Contractor is to take delivery of the PDS rice at Food Corporation of India (FCI) Godown, Jammikunta, and deliver the same at various Multi Level Stock (MLS) points in the District. On 25-07-2012, the petitioner has taken delivery of 17 trucks of PDS rice and despatched them to various MLS points. As the petitioner's ill luck would have it, four trucks loaded with 83.299 Metric Tonnes of PDS rice intended to be delivered at Asifabad and Kaghaznagar have not reached their destinations. The petitioner has, therefore, lodged a complaint in Jammikunta Police Station on 26-07-2012 upon which Crime No.170 of 2012 was registered, against the drivers and the owners of those four trucks, for the offences under Sections 420 and 407 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. On the same day, the petitioner sent a fax message to respondent No.3 duly furnishing the details of the 17 trucks in which 423.317 Metric Tonns of PDS rice was transported on 25-07- 2012 and informing that 4 trucks have not reached their respective destinations; that the mobile phones of the owners and drivers of the said trucks were switched off and that a complaint was lodged in that regard.
Respondent No.3 has issued Memo, dated 27-07-2012, wherein he has alleged negligence against the petitioner and asked him to furnish reasons within 24 hours as to why double the cost of the commodity i.e., 83.299 Metric Tonns of PDS rice should not be recovered from him. The petitioner has immediately submitted his explanation wherein, while expressing his helplessness for the acts done by the drivers and owners of the four trucks, he has owned his responsibility by requesting respondent No.2 to permit him to purchase the stock in the open market at his cost and send the same to the MLS points. The petitioner pleaded that the Police have traced the rice transported in the four trucks and intimated the same to respondent No.3 on 29-07-2012.
The Inspector of Police, Jammikunta Police Station, has addressed letter on 31-07-2012 to the Collector (Civil Supplies), Warangal District, stating that on information, he sent his constables to Sri Rama Industries & Rice Mill, Madaram of Parakala Mandal and confirmed the case property; that while he was proceeding to the spot to seize the said property pertaining to the case, the GPA, Warangal M.Kumara Swamy along with the staff reached the spot and seized the said property of 1260 rice bags under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), and that in all 12 persons, who were shown as accused, including receivers of the stolen property were arrested, 4 trucks were seized and produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on 30-07- 2012. A similar letter was addressed by the Station House Officer on 31-07-2012 to the Collector (CS), Karimnagar, about the seizure of 420 rice bags by the Tahsildar, Huzurabad, and Assistant Civil Supply Officer, from Lavakusa Traders C/o.Vijaya Krishna MRM Bornapalli Village of Huzurabad Mandal, Karimnagar District, and requested to hand over the case property for depositing the same before the jurisdictional Court.
By proceeding, dated 01-08-2012, respondent No.1 has suspended the transport contract of the petitioner for the year 2012-13 and directed respondent No.3 to make alternative arrangements for the transportation of foodgrains meant for Public Distribution System. Questioning this proceeding, the petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.
After hearing both the sides, this Court passed the following interim order, on 07-08-2012:
"Sri A.Ravinder Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Civil Supplies Corporation takes notice for respondents and seeks time for filing counter affidavit.
A perusal of the record shows that out of seventeen trucks carrying rice meant for public distribution system dispatched by the petitioner, a stage I contractor, four trucks have not reached MLS points in Adilabad District. On the petitioner giving a complaint in this regard, criminal case was registered and it was found that the four trucks were diverted by their respective drivers to two rice mills. Criminal cases were registered against the owners of rice mills, that of the lorries, the middle men allegedly involved in the illegal acts and the drivers of the trucks. By order dated 01.08.2012 the petitioner's stage I contract was suspended by respondent No.1. A perusal of the record shows that there is no whisper of involvement of the petitioner either directly or indirectly in the diversion of the food grains. Evidently, the petitioner has become victim of circumstances.
Sri T.Mahender Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that his client in fact offered to procure rice from the open market in lieu of the four trucks of stocks illegally diverted by the drivers.
Unless the bona fides of the petitioner are suspected, which does not appear to be the case, I do not find any justification for suspending his contract, more so, when the petitioner is offering to make good the loss sustained by the Corporation on account of illegal diversion of the food grains.
In this view of the matter, I find the elements of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury in favour of the petitioner.
Accordingly, the impugned proceedings of respondent No.1 are suspended, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall within one month from today procure the rice equal to the quantities of the rice which were not accounted for on account of the illegal acts of the drivers of the four trucks and others. The petitioner is entitled to operate the contract and receive the bills. The rice procured by the petitioner as directed above shall, however, be subject to the result of the criminal and other proceedings pending before the appropriate courts.
Post on 28.08.2012."
Today, at the hearing, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the parties that the above-reproduced interim order has been given effect to and the petitioner has purchased the entire quantity of rice, which could not be delivered on account of the criminal acts of the driver and owners of the four trucks.
A counter-affidavit has been filed by Mr.D.Varaprasad, Vice Chairman and Managing Director of respondent No.1- Corporation wherein the above-noted facts leading to the 4 trucks not reaching their respective destinations were admitted. He has also admitted that three out of the four trucks containing 1260 bags were unloaded at Sri Rama Industries and Rice Mill, Madaram, Parakala Mandal of Warangal District; that 420 bags transported in one truck were traced and found unloaded at Lavakusa Traders belonging to one Vijaya Krishna MRM, Bornapalli, Huzurabad, Karimnagar District, and that all those stocks were seized under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act. Respondent No.1 has, however, alleged that the petitioner failed to comply with Clauses 3(iii), 9 (iii), 12 (iii), 12 (iv) and 12 (vii) of the agreement entered into by him with respondent No.1- Corporation.
The respondents have not made any whisper of either collusion or complicity against the petitioner with the drivers/owners of the trucks, who allegedly diverted the four trucks, after the same were loaded with PDS rice at the FCI godown at Jammikunta. The petitioner is not shown as accused in the criminal case. It is, therefore, beyond one's comprehension as to how the petitioner can be made responsible for the unfortunate event, which occurred on account of the diabolical acts alleged to the drivers and the owners of the trucks. None of the Clauses, on which reliance is placed, would justify taking action against the petitioner on the given set of facts. Even the best of the precautions that might have been taken by the petitioner would not have prevented persons with criminal intention to commit the acts of unlawful diversion of rice. Unless the respondents have suspected the bona fides of the petitioner, I do not find any justification whatsoever for them to suspend the transport contract awarded in favour of the petitioner. The bona fides of the petitioner are well established by his agreeing to replenish the lost goods at the earliest possible time by addressing letter to respondent No.2 as already noted above. The petitioner has, in fact, proved his further bona fides by buying the rice in the open market and supplying the same in order to make good the loss sustained by respondent No.1- Corporation. In the light of the above undisputed facts, the impugned order suspending the petitioner's transport contract cannot be sustained either in law or on facts and the same is, therefore, is set aside. It is needless to observe that the petitioner is entitled to receive the value of the stocks replenished by him, if he succeeds in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act pending before the respective District Collectors.
The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above with costs of Rs.10,000/-.
As a sequel, WPMP.Nos.31053 and 31054 of 2012, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, are disposed of as infructuous.
_________________________ (C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Date: 25-09-2012