THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 12899 of 2011 ORDER: Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned G.P. for Revenue and with their consent the writ petition itself is disposed of at stage of admission. The petitioner assails the order dt. 22.4.2011 of the District Collector, West Godavari, Eluru whereby the District Collector requested the Food Inspector, Eluru and C.S.D.T. to dispose of the stock seized by public auction and realise the sale proceeds and remit the same to the Sub-Treasury. The petitioner is doing business in food grains and edible oils under a valid licence. On 11.4.2011 the Vigilance and Enforcement Authorities consisting of respondents 2 and 3 inspected his shop and found certain variation in the stocks of rice and oil. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent submitted a report dt. 12.4.2011 to the District Collector. Basing on the said report dt. 12.4.2011, the 1st respondent initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act (for short ‘the Act) alleging that the petitioner contravened the provisions of the A.P.S.C. Dealers (L.S. & R) Order, 2008 and directed for the disposal of the stocks seized, by the impugned proceedings. The learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations made against the petitioner are false. It is stated that the petitioner did not commit any irregularity as alleged by the inspecting officials. It is contended that the stock seized was received on the date of inspection and the same was not entered in the stock register and generally the stock will be entered in the register at the closing of the day and as the inspection was conducted during day time, there was no occasion for the petitioner to enter the stock in the register and if the same is taken into consideration, there will not be any variation in the stocks as alleged by the inspecting officials. The Counsel submits that the petitioner filed a petition on 22.4.2011 requesting for release of the stocks seized and he is ready to furnish bank guarantee for the value of the stocks seized, pending disposal of enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that without taking into consideration, the petition submitted by him for release of the seized stock, the 1st respondent passed the impugned proceedings. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking to declare the proceeding of the 1st respondent dt. 22.4.2011 as being illegal and arbitrary. Since the 1st respondent has already initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, I am not inclined to go into the merits of the case. The petitioner can appear before the 1st respondent and defend his case. However, it may be mentioned that if the petitioner succeeds in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, he will be put to loss if the seized stock is sold as directed by the 1st respondent by the impugned proceedings. Therefore, I am of the view that it would be just and reasonable to direct the 1st respondent to complete the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act within a reasonable time. Accordingly, the 1st respondent is directed to complete the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act as early as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending disposal of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, the seized stocks shall not be sold. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ NOUSHAD ALI, J 28.04.2011. Issue c.c. in two days. B/o: KRB. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 12899 of 2011 ORDER: Dt. 28.04.2011.