THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY W.P.No.28155 of 2010 Date : 20-12-2010 Between: M/s.Raja Rajeshwara Filling Station Represented by its Proprietor V.Bhaskar .. Petitioner And The Tahsildar, Banswada, Nizamabad District and another .. Respondents Counsel for petitioner : Sri V.H.V.R.R. Swamy Counsel for respondents : Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies The Court made the following : ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a mandamus to declare seizure of petrol bunk belonging to the petitioner by respondent No.1 on 7-11- 2010 as null and void. The petitioner is a dealer in petroleum products. Consequent on inspection made by respondent No.1 on 7-11-2010, high speed diesel and motor spirit available in the petitioner’s retail outlet were seized. According to the petitioner, respondent No.1 has seized the whole petrol bunk and that he is not having power or authority to inspect and seize the bunk. In the counter affidavit filed by respondent No.1 it is inter alia stated that under Clause-7 of the Motor Spirit and High Speed Diesel (Regulation of Supply and Distribution and Prevention of Malpractices) Order 2005 (for short “the 2005 Order”) and Clause- 32(d) of A.P. Petroleum Products (Licensing and Regulation of Supplies) Order 1980, (for short “the 1980 Order”), he has power to seize the petrol bunk. It is further averred that the petitioner was found mixing water with diesel and that there is variation of +40% in motor spirit and –26% in diesel oil. Respondent No.1 also averred that he has verified physically the stocks of motor spirit and high speed diesel by dip system in the presence of panchas and other revenue officers with reference to stock register and seized the products. Respondent No.1 has however denied seizure of administrative office of the petitioner and stated that he has only sealed the outlet pump so that the stock cannot be drawn. At the hearing, Sri V.H.V.R.R.Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, stated that following the procedure, the petitioner’s licence was suspended under Clause 28(2) of the 1980 Order and that an appeal is pending. He has also submitted that against the order passed under Section 6-A(2) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”), the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition which was disposed of by this court with the direction to the respondents not to sell the seized stocks till disposal of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. In the light of the plea taken by respondent No.1 that he has only sealed the outlet pump in order to prevent the petitioner from carrying on the transactions and that administrative office of the petitioner is not sealed, the prayer sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted. As the seizure of the petroleum products and suspension of licence are subject matter of separate legal proceedings, no relief with regard thereto can be granted in this Writ Petition. The petitioner is left free to pursue the said proceedings already initiated by him before different fora. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the Writ Petition, WPMP No.35911/2010 is dismissed as infructuous. __________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY.,J Date: 20-12-2010 AM