IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17930 of 2009 Between: Nalam Dinkar S/o. Rajanna, R/o.Door No. 4-3-18/50. Gunj Road, Ambedkar Chowk, Adilabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Supply Officer, Essential Commodities) Adilabad. 2 The District Collector, Adilabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction or issue an appropriate writ, more particularly in the natureof writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the seized rice of 421.25 quintals under Panchanama dated 19-8-2009 and consequently declare the action of the respondents No.1 in seizing the said rice is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14, of the Constittuion of India, and against the provisions of A.P Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, storage and REgulation) ORder 2008 Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.CHANDRASEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 17930 of 2009 ORDER: 1 The petitioner approached this court and filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer: “For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction or issue an appropriate writ, more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the seized rice of 421.25 quintals under Panchanama dated 19-8-2009 and consequently declare the action of the respondents No.1 in seizing the said rice is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14, of the Constitution of India, and against the provisions of A.P Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, storage and Regulation) Order 2008 and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case” 2 Heard both sides. 3 Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that proceedings under section 6 A of the Essential Commodities Act have already been initiated, and the request is only for stay of sale of the seized commodities, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Collector – Second respondent to complete the said enquiry initiated under section 6 A of the Essential Commodities Act within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the stocks seized from out of the business premises of the petitioner on 19.08.2009 shall not be sold by way of public auction. No order as to costs. -------------------- 26.08.2009 kvsn