IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13984 of 2009 Between: 1 G.Ram Gopal Reddy S/o. G.C. Narsi Reddy R/o. Gooriganuru Village, Jammalamadugu Mandal, Kadapa District. 2 K.Durga W/o. Subbarao R/o. D.No. 10/32, Thadigadapa Village, Penamaluru Mandal, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The District Collector, Kadapa ( Civil Supplies wing ) 2 The Joint Collector, Kadapa ( Civil Supplies wing ) 3 The Vigilance and Enforcement Inspector, Kadapa. 4 The Deputy Tahsildar, Poddutur, Kadapa District/ 5 The Tahsildar, Poddutur Mandal, Kadapa .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.VINAY KAMISETTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: Despite adjournment of the case twice, neither counter-affidavit is filed nor instructions are reported on behalf of the respondents. Petitioner No.1 claims to be an agriculturist having 20 acres of land and produced 308 bags of Kavya variety of paddy therein. He pleaded that out of the said quantity, he kept 34 bags for his domestic purpose and was transporting remaining 274 bags to Miryalguda Village of Nalgonda District in order to get a better price. The lorry belonging to petitioner No.2, by which the said paddy was being transported, was being intercepted on 23-06-2009 at about 7.30 p.m., near Bollavaram Village, at the outskirts of Proddutur, Kadapa District, and was seized under Panchanama, dated 24-06-2009. It is stated in the Panchanama that no documents were produced by petitioner No.1 for transporting the said paddy. Auction Notice was issued by respondent No.5 on 08-07-2009, fixing 15-07-2009 as the date for holding auction of the seized stock. The petitioners filed this Writ Petition questioning the seizure and the consequential Auction Notice. As noted above, petitioner No.1 claims to be an agriculturist having produced the seized paddy in his agricultural lands. He apprehends that if the seized paddy is sold in public auction, it may not fetch proper price. Since the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) are pending and a Show Cause Notice under Section 6-B of the Act has already been issued on 09-07-2009, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition in the following terms: 1. The seized paddy shall be permitted to be sold by the petitioner under the supervision and direct control of the District Manager, A.P State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Kadapa, within a period of three weeks from today; 2. The sale proceeds shall be deposited by the District Manager, A.P State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Kadapa, to the Credit of respondent No.1; 3. If the petitioner fails to dispose of the paddy within the above stipulated time, the respondents shall be free to dispose of the same on their own; 4. The petitioner is permitted to file an explanation to Show Cause Notice, dated 09-07-2009, within a period of two weeks from today and; 5. Appropriation of sale proceeds shall be subject to the result of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.Nos.18304 and 18305 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief are disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 21st July, 2009 lur