IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.13158 of 2009 Between: Donthula Vishwanatham S/o.Shankaraiah proprietor of M/s. Maheshweri Traders, 1-7-28, Gandhinagar, Vemulawada village and Mandal, Karimnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector (CS), Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 2 The Joint Collector (CS), Karimnagar District, Karimnagar. 3 The Assistant Supply Officer/In charge Assistant Grains purchase officer (AGPO), Karimnagar. 4 The Assistant Supply Officer, Siricilla, Karimnagar District. 5 The Tahsildar, Vemulwada Mandal, Vemulwada, Karimnagar District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is an edible oil dealer, who is covered by Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008 (for short ‘2008 Order). Inspection of the petitioner’s shop by the Assistant Supply Officer, Siricilla, revealed the following variations of groundnut oil and palmolin oil between the book balance and the ground balance. Sl.No. Commodity Stock as p e r Stock Register Qtls. Book Balance Ground balance Variation 1. Groundnut Oil 22.94 22.94 25.03 2.09 (+) 2. P.Oil 17.70 17.70 17.36 0.34 (-) On the above premise, the stocks were seized and the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) were initiated. The petitioner made an application on 09.06.2009 before respondent No.1 for release of the seized stock. However, by order, dated 21.06.2009, respondent No.1 directed the stock to be sold through public auction. I have heard Sri K.Venumadhav, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies for the respondents. A perusal of the impugned order does not show that the petitioner’s application for release of the seized stock was considered. The petitioner pleaded that while there was a bona fide reason for the variations in the stocks of groundnut oil and palmolin oil, these variations have no relevance at all. He further pleaded that he has not violated any of the clauses of the above-mentioned 2008 Order. Clause 10 of the 2008 Order places restrictions on the possession of scheduled commodities. Sub-Clause (v) of the said Clause prescribes limitations for wholesalers and retailers. At the hearing, it is not disputed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies that in areas other than those mentioned in Clause 10(v)(b)(1) and (2), a wholesale dealer is entitled to store edible oils up to 375 quintals. Even assuming that there was excess stock of 2.09 quintals of groundnut oil and 0.34 quintals of palmolin oil and even if the entire stock is taken into consideration, the said quantity falls far below the maximum quantity of oil, which a wholesale dealer is permitted to store. Therefore, prima facie, the direction for sale of the seized stock in public auction pending proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act cannot be sustained. The writ petition is accordingly, allowed and the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 is set aside. Respondent No.1 is directed to release the seized stock to the petitioner subject to his furnishing immovable property security for the value of the stock. The same shall be subject to the result of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 3rd JULY, 2009. kvni