HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20508 of 2010 Dated: 18.08.2010 Between: Ch. Anil Kumar. …..Petitioner And The Joint Collector (CS), Karimnagar District & others. …..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.20508 of 2010 ORDER : Heard learned counsel for petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks directions by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondents in seizing the stock of 5.25 quintals of Erramallelu rice, 25 quintals of Sonamasur rice and 14 quintals of Sambamasur rice, in total 44.25 quintals of rice, by conducting a panchanama on 5th of August 2010, as illegal. The petitioner is a licensee to deal in food-grains, under the provisions of the A.P. Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation​) Order, 2008. His business premises was inspected by the Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies), Huzurabad and Food Inspector, Huzurabad on 5th of August 2010. On the ground that the petitioner is not maintaining the registers as contemplated under the A.P. Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008, the available quantity of 44.25 quintals of rice was seized. It is stated that the seizure report is submitted to the 1st respondent-Joint Collector (Civil Supplies), Karimnagar, and proceedings are pending before him. On the ground that during the pendency of proceedings, the respondents are taking steps to sell the seized commodity, the petitioner has approached this Court. It is the case of the petitioner that as he is holding valid license and maintaining all the registers as per the A.P. Schedule Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008, there is no reason for seizing the stocks. With regard to the allegations made against the petitioner, it is a matter for inquiry by the authority under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and when such inquiry is pending, it is not for this Court to decide whether the petitioner has violated any provisions thereon. As the seized commodity is only 44.25 quintals, and as much as it is not in dispute that the petitioner is possessing valid license and the only allegation is that the registers are not properly maintained, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing respondent No.1 to complete the inquiry in 6-A proceedings as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from today, and till appropriate final orders are passed in the said proceedings, respondents shall not sell the seized commodity. It is also directed that in case of any damage to the seized commodity, the petitioner shall not claim any damages. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 18th August 2010. ajr