THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL No.519 of 2010 July 14, 2010 Between: P.Lingaiah, S/o.Veeraiah … Appellant And The Joint Collector (CS), Warangal District at Subedari, Warangal. And another ... Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL No.519 of 2010 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.V.S.Rao) The appellant is owner of lorry of Ashok Leyland make bearing No.AP 24V 0888. He is also driver of the said lorry. The lorry was seized on 07.6.2010 when it was transporting essential commodities allegedly in contravention of Clauses 3, 4, 7 and 9 of Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008 read with Clauses 3-A, 4(c) and 7 of Andhra Pradesh Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984. A report was submitted to the Joint Collector, Warangal, for initiating proceedings under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act). The petitioner then moved an application for release of the lorry by way of interim measure. The Joint Collector passed orders on 15.6.2010 directing release of the lorry on furnishing Bank Guarantee (BG) for Rs.2,82,880/-, presumably approximate value of the lorry. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed writ petition being W.P.No.14099 of 2010, impugning the very panchanama under which essential commodities and the lorry were seized. Learned Single Judge by impugned order dated 21.6.2010 dismissed the writ petition observing that the Joint Collector should dispose of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act expeditiously. The counsel for petitioner and the Government Pleader for Civil Supplies made their submissions reiterating their respective positions. The controversy is in narrow compass. Whether the Joint Collector is in error in directing the interim release of the lorry to the petitioner on furnishing BG for Rs.2,82,880/- is the only point for adjudication. Learned Judge found no justifiable reason to interfere with the order of Joint Collector dated 15.6.2010. We do not find any strong reason to differ with conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Judge. It is well settled that under first proviso to Section 6-A of the Act, essential commodities seized for alleged contravention of provisions of the Act or any Control Order made thereunder cannot be released. However under the second proviso, animal, vehicle, vessel or any other conveyance used for carriage of goods can be released if proper security is furnished towards the market price of the essential commodities seized which was carried by the vehicle. In that view of the matter, we do not find any error in the impugned order. The writ petition, for the above reasons, is accordingly dismissed. ________________ (V.V.S. RAO, J) _______________________________ (RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J) July 14, 2010 YS