IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No. 24931 of 2009 Between: 1.Pasumarti Krishna Rao, S/o Narayana Murthy, 50 years, Occ: Proprietor, Sri Virabhadra Flour Mills, Peraigudem, Ashwaraopet Mandal, Khammam District and another ..... PETITIONERS AND 1. The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Khammam, Khammam District and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.24931 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the seizure dated 09.11.2009 made by the 2nd respondent and the action of the 1st respondent in not passing any orders on the petition filed by the petitioners, on 13.11.2009, for release of stocks, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently sought for a direction to the 1st respondent to release the seized stocks in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners are having valid licences to carry on business in rice. On 09.11.2009, the 2nd respondent inspected the business premises of the petitioners and also the flour mills and seized the available stock i.e., 121.00 quintals of Greengram; 7.80 quintals of Putnalu (Greengram); 1.50 quintals of Toordal; 4.00 quintals of groundnuts; 3.00 quintals of black gram; 3.00 quintals of black gram (raw); 1.00 quintal of black gram (gundlu); 2.30 quintals of red gram; 30.50 quintals of boiled rice; 46.50 quintals of boiled broken rice; 46.50 quintals of broken rice and 24.00 quintals of sugar on the ground that the petitioners are doing business contrary to the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (LS&R) Order, 2008. Pursuant thereto, on the basis of the report furnished by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act. Subsequently, the petitioners filed an application, on 13.11.2009, before the 1st respondent requesting him to release the seized stocks, but no order has been passed as on date. Hence the present writ petition. Heard both sides. Since the petitioners have come forward stating that they are prepared to furnish bank guarantee as assessed by the 1st respondent, this Court is of the view that instead of keeping the stocks during the pendency of the proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, the same may be ordered to be released in favour of the petitioners. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent-District Collector to release the seized stocks in favour of the petitioners on condition of their furnishing bank guarantee as assessed by the 1st respondent. The proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 by the 1st respondent herein shall be completed at the earliest, preferably within a period of eight weeks from today. No order as to costs. _________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 17-11-2009 Gsn.