THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30994 of 2011 Date: 25.11.2011 Between: M/s. Sri Shanmukha Agro Traders, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District. … Petitioner and The District Collector, Ongole, Prakasam District and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30994 of 2011 ORDER : Heard Sri N. Ravi Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. Having regard to the short relief sought for at the hearing not to sell the seized stock of fertilizers pending disposal of the enquiry by the 1st respondent, with the consent of both the counsel the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. The petitioner, who is a licencee under the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985 (for brevity “the Control Order”), has filed this writ petition challenging the proceedings Rc.CS1/6A/199/2011 of the 1st respondent-District Collector, Prakasam District, directing interim disposal of the seized stock of fertilizers of the petitioner, as arbitrary and illegal. 3. The petitioner claims to be the proprietor of M/s. Sri Shanmukha Agro Traders, situated at Konanki Post, Martur Mandal, Prakasam District, and engaged in the business of pesticides under a valid licence obtained under the Control Order. The Deputy Director of Agriculture and the 4th respondent-Mandal Agriculture Officer and Fertilizer Inspector, Martur, Prakasam District, inspected the business premises of the petitioner on from 5.10.2011 to 9.10.2011 and seized the stocks of fertilizers on the ground that the petitioner has not renewed the licence and doing business without valid licence. A report dated 10.10.2011 has been laid before the 1st respondent for initiation of an enquiry under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for brevity “the Act”). Taking cognizance of the said report, the 1st respondent issued a show cause notice dated 5.11.2011 under Section 6-B of the Act. The 1st respondent also initiated action for confiscation of the seized stock and passed the impugned order. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner holds a valid licence under the Control Order. After the expiry of the said licence on 18.8.2008, he submitted an application for renewal on 22.8.2008 in terms of Clause 11 (3) of the Control Order. Inspite of the same, the authorities have not passed any order on the said application, therefore, the licence of the petitioner is still valid in terms of Clause 11 (4) of the Control Order. In view of the same, the seizure effected on the sole ground that the petitioner does not hold valid licence is unsustainable. Even though the petitioner has challenged the seizure of the stock, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since an enquiry is necessary and pending for adjudicating into the allegations and in the meanwhile if the seized stock is sold, the petitioner would suffer grave and irreparable loss. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that the 1st respondent be directed to dispose of the enquiry within a time frame and in the meanwhile not to sell the seized stock of fertilizers. 5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has no objection for issuing such a direction. 6. It is true that once a report is laid alleging contravention of the provisions of the Control Order, the 1st respondent is competent to initiate proceedings for eventual confiscation of the seized stock. However, in matters of this nature, the Statutory authorities are expected to pass orders expeditiously within a reasonable time. Since the enquiry initiated under Section 6-A of the Act is likely to take some time, in the meanwhile, if the seized stock is sold, it might cause grave and irreparable loss to the petitioner. 7. In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to complete the enquiry initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 in pursuance of the report dated 10.10.2011 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till conclusion of the said enquiry and final orders are passed, the impugned order dated 5.11.2011 shall be kept in abeyance and the seized fertilizers stock of the petitioner shall not be sold or otherwise disposed of. No order as to costs. 8. In view of disposal of the writ petition, the W.P.M.Ps. pending, if any, are dismissed as unnecessary. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 25.11.2011. NOTE: Issue C.C. today. (B/O) Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30994 of 2011 25.11.2011 (Msr)