IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.10752 of 2009 Between: M/s. Balaji Traders, Gangaram Village, represented by its Proprietor Sri G.Reddaiah Reddy S/o. G.Pitchi Reddy (late) Shop No.2-132/1, Gangaram, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector (C.S)-II, R.R. District, at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad-4. 2 The Assistant Supply Officer O/o. D.S.O. R.R. District, 4th Floor, Collectorate Building, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.BOLLAM LINGAIAH YADAV Counsel for the Respondents:AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a writ of mandamus to set aside panchanama, dated 08-05-2009 conducted by respondent No.2. The petitioner is a food grains dealer. On 08.05.2009, his shop bearing No.2-132/1 of Gangaram Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District was inspected by respondent No.2 and 69 quintals of rice was seized on the purported ground of violation of clause 7(a) of the Andhra Pradesh Rice Procurement Levy Order, under a panchanama. The petitioner assailed this action in this writ petition. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner averred that subsequent to the seizure of rice, he approached respondent No.1 on 11-05-2009 for release of the seized stock and that no order has been passed thereon. At the hearing, Sri B.Lingaiah Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) are pending before respondent No.1 and that there is a likelihood of the seized stock being sold even before completion of the said proceedings. The learned Assistant Government Pleader of Civil Supplies submitted that so far, there are no proposals for sale of the seized stock. Having considered the facts of the case, I do not find any reason to set aside panchanama, dated 08.05.2009. Admittedly, stocks were seized following the inspection, wherein certain violations were allegedly found. Whether the petitioner committed those violations or not is required to be adjudicated in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, which are admittedly, pending before respondent No.1. Under these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the direction to respondent No.1 to complete the proceedings under Section 6- A of the Act, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pending the said proceedings, the seized stock belonging to the petitioner shall not be sold. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.13813 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 2nd June, 2009. Note:issue C.C. in two days. ktl/kvni