IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE NINETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 10987 of 2009 Between: B.Bhaskar Reddy and four others. ..... PETITIONER(S) AND The Joint Collector, Ananthapur, Ananthapur District and two others. .....RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.S.D.GOWD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS} HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.10987 of 2009 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner sought for writ of mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No.1 in stipulating condition of furnishing total value of seized stock for its release as illegal. 2. Heard Sri S.D. Goud, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents. 3. A perusal of the Panchanama prepared on 27-05-2009 shows that lorry bearing Regn. No.KA.40.A.8889 carrying load of 252 bags each weighing 65 Kgs. of 1010 variety was intercepted and seized on 27-05-2009 and the same was kept at the police station of Kureru. The petitioner moved respondent No.1 for release of the said seized stock. By the impugned order, respondent No.1 directed to release the seized stock subject to the petitioner furnishing total value of the said stock. 4. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that while restriction on movement of paddy and rice was confined to B.P.T. and Sonamasuri verities only under G.O.Ms.No.46, dated 10-11-2008, respondent No.2 was totally unjustified in stipulating the condition of furnishing of the value of the entire stock for its release. The learned counsel placed reliance on order dated 27-05-2009 passed by respondent No.1 under which 90 bags of paddy of 1010 variety was released to its owner without any such stipulation. 5. Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has taken time for instructions, he reported no instructions. 6. However, a perusal of G.O.Ms.No.46, dated 10-11-2008, shows that restriction on movement of the paddy and rice was imposed by the Government only on super fine variety viz., B.P.T. and Sonamasuri. In his order, dated 27-05-2009, respondent No.1 directed release of 90 bags of paddy unconditionally by stating that the said paddy was of 1010 variety. 7. Having examined the case carefully, I am of the view that stipulation of condition of furnishing total value of seized condition to release paddy, which admittedly does not fall within the description of super fine variety, is arbitrary and irrational. 8. The writ petition is, therefore, allowed. Respondents are directed to release the seized paddy of 252 bags to the petitioners on their furnishing third party security for the value of the seized stock, within a period of two weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that release of paddy shall be subject to the result of proceedings pending under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, before respondent No.1. No costs. 9. As a sequel to disposal of writ petition, in the manner indicated above, W.P.M.P.No.14129 of 2009 is also disposed of as infructuous. _______________________ Date: 09-06-2009 C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Note: Issue C.C. in five days. B/o. KVR