IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 10451 of 2009 Between: M/s. Saraswathi Enterprises Reptd. by its Proprietor, Pydimarla Sathi Reddy, D.No. 7-158, Gopalapuram Village & Mandal, West Godavari District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector West Godavari District Eluru. 2 The District Civil Supplies Officer Eluru West Godavari District. 3 The Tahsildar Gopalapuram Mandal Gopalapuram, West Godavari District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent authority in issuing proceedings in Roc.No.CS.I/17/ECA/2009, dated 26-3- 2009 as arbitrary, illegal, null and void, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Article 19(1)(g) and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondent authorities to release the seized stocks of 2.40 quintals of Sona Masoori Rice and 30.24 quintals of PL Rice belonging to the petitioner. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.BALAJI MEDAMALLI Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO WRIT PETITION NO.10451 OF 2009 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. The only grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the fact that the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act (for short ‘the Act’) are pending, the respondents are trying to sell the seized stocks, which is illegal. Hence, this writ petition. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and also perused the material on record. When the main proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act are pending, the respondents are not justified in selling the seized stocks. In the circumstances, it would suffice if a direction is issued to the respondents to conclude the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, expeditiously. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to conclude the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act initiated against the petitioner and pending conclusion of the same, there shall be stay of disposal of seized stocks. No costs. ____________________ B.PRAKASH RAO,J DATE: 28th May, 2009 Pnb/sur