IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 14489 of 2008 Between: Gangothri Gramykya Sangham, Gundlapalli Village,Medipalli Mandal, Karimnagar District, Rep by its President Smt. T.T.Raju, W/o.Gangaram, aged 35 years, Occ-Housewife, R/o. Gundlapalli Village, Medipalli Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (CS) Karimnagar, 2 The Joint Collector/Collector(CS), Karimnagar. 3 The Food Inspector, Jagtial, Karimnagar District. 4 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance(Enforcement) Karimnagar. 5 The Deputy Tahsildar(CS), Peddapalli, Karimnagar District. 6 The Tahsildar(CS), Jagtial Mandal, Karimnagar District. 7 The Mandal Revenue Inspector,Jagtial , Karimnagar District. .....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 to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mnadamus directing the respondents 1,2,6 and 7 not to sell the seized stocks i.e., 30 quintals of Rice which were seized from 3 Autos bearing Nos. i.e. AP 15X7386, AP15X9547 AND AP 15X3306 By the Respodnents 3 to 5 by conducting a panchanama on 15-5-2008 at Morepalli Village, Jagtial Mandal, Karimnagar District while transporting the same from Gouri shankar Modern Rice Mill, Chelgal, jagtial Mandal, Karimnagar District to the Petitioner Sangham at Gundlapalli Village pursuant to the interim disposal order passed by the 1st Respondent vide G3/636/08 dated 18-6-2008 pending disposal of the 6-A enquiry on the file of the Respondents 1 and 2 by duly delcaring the interim disposal order passed by the 1st Respondent vide No.G3/636/08 dated 18-6-2008 and the consequential Memo No.A/1078/08 dated 3-7-2008 issued by the Tahsildar, jagtial directing the Respondent no.7 to take possession of 30 quintals of rice from custodian Sri Ch.Kishan Rao and dispose the same through public auction and remit thesale proceeds to the Government account as arbitrary,illegal, and contrary to the provisions of the Essential commodities Act, 1955 and the control Orders made there under and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.RAVI KIRAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following at the stage of admission : ORAL ORDER: Writ Petition is filed apprehending that the Respondents 1 to 7 would sell the seized stock of 30 quintals of rice which was seized from three Autos bearing Nos. AP 15 X 7386, AP 15 X 9547 and AP 15 W 3306 on 15.5.2008 at Morepalli Village, Jagtial Mandal, Karimnagar District. M/s Gourishankar Modern Rice Mill had earlier filed W.P.No.12666 of 2008, assailing an order of the District Collector (CS), Karimnagar directing sale of the commodities seized from the petitioner-Rice Mill, on allegations of violation of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). By the judgment dated 18.6.2008, the W.P.No.12666 of 2008 was disposed of quashing the order of the 1st respondent therein, directing interim sale of the seized commodities and further directing expeditious conclusion of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner therein, under the provisions of the Act, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order of this Court. In the case on hand, by the order of the 1st respondent dated 18.6.2008, the quantity of 60 bags of rice of 0.50 quintals each transported in the three Autos is directed to be sold pending finalization of the case under the Act, on the ground that the seized rice is subject to speedy and natural decay. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner had already submitted an application for interim release of the seized commodity in its favour, claiming that the seized commodity of rice was purchased by the petitioner from M/s Gourishankar Modern Rice Mill and while in process of transportation to the petitioner’s premises, the Autos were intercepted and the commodity seized. Whether the petitioner is entitled to release of the seized commodity is a matter for the competent authority i.e., the District Collector or the Joint Collector as the case may be, to determine on the application of the petitioner for such interim release. In this Writ Petition, this Court is concerned only with the validity of the impugned order of the 1st respondent dated 18.6.2008 directing the sale of the seized commodity of rice. The impugned order of the first respondent dated 18.6.2008 records that the seized rice is subject to speedy and natural decay, an assertion which is irrational. Should the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act consume a couple of years, this assertion may be valid. But within the narrow issues that fall for consideration by the competent authorities (in a proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act), the final determination should not take more than a couple of weeks and that is not the timeframe within which the seized commodity of rice could be said to be subject to speedy and natural decay. The assertion as to speedy and natural decay of the seized commodity is casually made in the impugned order of the 1st respondent and thus invites invalidation. The order of the first respondent dated 18.6.2008 is accordingly quashed. The appropriate authority i.e., the first or the second respondent shall expeditiously conclude the final enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act and the disposal of the seized commodity will abide by the result of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. It is also open to the competent authority to consider the application of the petitioner for interim release in its favour of the seized commodity, on merits. The writ petition is disposed of as above. There shall be no order as to costs. GODA RAGHURAM, J Date: 14.7.2008 Note: CC as soon as possible. Bo cvm