THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.3446 of 2011 Date:15.02.2011 Between: M. Dharmichand ..... Petitioner AND The Joint Collector (CS), Chittoor and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri S.V. Muni Reddy Counsel for Respondents: Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies The Court made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the seizure of 18.50 quintals of rice and 1760 litres of kerosene from fair price shop No.6 of Sathyavedu in respect of which the petitioner possess authorization as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner is the fair price shop dealer of the abovementioned shop. The said shop was inspected on 17.01.2011 by the Inspector of Police, Regional Vigilance & Enforcement Branch, Tirupati, who seized 18.50 quintals of rice and 1760 litres of kerosene and handed over the same to the Mandal Revenue Inspector, Satyavedu. In pursuance of the seizure report, proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) have been initiated. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, I am of the opinion that the petitioner failed to make out any case for interference by this Court against the seizure. In order to ensure that the fair price shops are run properly and proper distribution of essential commodities, the Civil Supplies Department is entitled to inspect the shops and wherever they notice any irregularity in the running of the shops, they are entitled to seize the commodities which will be subject to the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. Since the commodities seized from the possession of the petitioner are meant for public distribution, the competent authority under Section 6-A of the Act is expected to make proper arrangements for their disposal. In the event of the petitioner succeeding in the proceedings under Section 6- A of the Act, the sale proceeds will be appropriately adjusted. In this view of the matter, no exception can be taken to the seizure of the commodities from the petitioner’s shop at this stage. The petitioner is entitled to participate in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act and plead his case before respondent No.1. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.4259 of 2011 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 15th February, 2011 GHN