THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30640 of 2011 Date: 21.11.2011 Between: B. Appala Raju … Petitioner and The Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam District, Visakhapatnam and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30640 of 2011 ORDER : Heard Sri A. Ravi Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. In view of the short relief sought for in the writ petition for release of the vehicle on furnishing a reasonable security, with the consent of both the counsel, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage. 2. The petitioner is the owner of tanker Lorry bearing No. AP-31-TA-9966. On 21.10.2011, the said lorry was inspected by the Vigilance Inspector and staff and found that it was carrying the load of 12 KL Diesel without valid licence. The vehicle, therefore, was seized under panchanama dated 21.10.2011. Based on a report submitted in that regard, the 1st respondent-Joint Collector, Visakhapatnam District, initiated action for confiscation of the vehicle under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for brevity “the Act”). The petitioner pleads that he is not guilty of the allegations alleged against him and that the stock was accompanied by the licencee to which the petitioner is no way concerned. The petitioner states that he has filed an application dated 24.10.2011 before the 1st respondent seeking release of the vehicle. As no orders are passed on the said application despite long lapse of time, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking release of the vehicle on reasonable terms. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to furnish necessary security. He also submits that the detention of the vehicle any longer would not serve any purpose and, on the other hand, the petitioner would suffer grave and irreparable loss since the vehicle itself has been purchased under hire purchase agreement. Learned counsel submits that although the vehicle was seized on 21.10.2011, the 1st respondent has not taken any steps to finalise the enquiry proceedings. He, therefore, submits that the vehicle be directed to be released subject to the petitioner furnishing adequate security. 4. Indisputably, the petitioner’s vehicle was seized on 21.10.2011 and the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act have already been initiated against the petitioner. It is true that the petitioner also approached the 1st respondent seeking release of the vehicle on 24.10.2011 and considerable time has elapsed eversince then. Therefore, the 1st respondent ought to have taken steps to consider the said application. 5. Under Section 6-A of the Act, any essential commodity seized for contravention of the provisions of the A.P. State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 and the vehicle used for carrying such commodity are liable to be confiscated. However, insofar as the vehicle is concerned, the second proviso to Section 6-A of the Act provides that in the case of any vehicle, which may be liable for confiscation, the owner of the vehicle shall be given an option to pay, in lieu of its confiscation, a fine not exceeding the market price at the date of seizure of the essential commodity. 6. Further, I am of the view that the detention of the petitioner’s vehicle for a long time would not serve any purpose and it would prejudicially affect the interest of the petitioner. Having regard to the said provision and the fact that the vehicle of the petitioner has been detained for quite a long time, I deem it appropriate that the vehicle be released subject to the condition of the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee to a sum equivalent to the value of the vehicle. 7. In the circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to release the petitioner’s tanker Lorry bearing No. AP-31-TA-9966 on condition of the petitioner furnishing bank guarantee to a sum equivalent to the value of the said vehicle to the satisfaction of the 1st respondent and also on filing an undertaking by the petitioner that he will not transfer or alienate the vehicle in question till appropriate final orders are passed by the competent authority pursuant to the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act and he will produce the vehicle as and when required for the purpose of enquiry. The 1st respondent is also directed to conclude the enquiry and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI 21.11.2011. NOTE: Issue C.C. by 22.11.2011. (B/O) Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No.30640 of 2011 21.11.2011 (Msr)