THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16919 of 2009 DATE: 18.08.2009 Between: M/s. Ashirwad Foods, rep. By its Prop. Nitesh Goel, Nagarjuna Colony, Kshaiguda, Ranga Reddy District. ... Petitioner and Collector (CS), Ranga Reddy District at Lakdikapul, Hyderabad and another ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16919 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of 1st respondent in not considering its applications dated 16.06.2009 and 10.07.2009 and not releasing the seized stocks, as null and void. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that it is a proprietory concern and doing business in rice at door No.1-10- 228/15/A, Nagarjuna colony, Kshaiguda, Ranga Reddy District, under a valid licence bearing No.4/853/08. On 09.06.2009 the Assistant Civil Supply officer, R.R. East Division, R.R. District - 2nd respondent has surprised its business premises, having found that it was conducting food-grains business without the relevant licence, seized 202.25 quintals of rice and 45.50 quintals of broken rice, under cover of panchanama dated 09.06.2009, and directed the petitioner to approach the Collector (CS), R.R. District - 1st respondent within three days, if he is aggrieved by the said seizure. Challenging the same, it filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11494 of 2009 before this Court and this Court disposed of the said writ petition on 12.06.2009 directing it to approach the 1st respondent and file an application either to seek release of the seized stocks or stay of sale. Accordingly, it has filed an application before the 1st respondent on 16.06.2009 seeking to release the seized stocks, but the same is still pending. Again on 10.07.2009 it filed another application before the 1st respondent seeking to release the seized stocks on bank guarantee. It also submitted explanation, to the notice issued by the 2nd respondent, under Section 6-B of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), calling upon to submit explanation, within 15 days from the date of receipt of said notice, to show cause, as to why the seized stocks should not be confiscated, under Section 6-A of the Act. But so far, neither the 6-A proceedings have been concluded nor its applications are considered by the 1st respondent. Aggrieved by the same, it filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel and taking into consideration that 6-A proceedings have already been initiated by the 1st respondent, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to complete the 6-A proceedings, at the earliest. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to complete the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending consideration of the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act, the stocks seized on 09.06.2009 shall not be sold. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 18th August, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16919 of 2009 (Disposed of) 18th August, 2009 CBS