IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No. 24998 of 2009 Between: Damarla Ramakanth, S/o Damarla Mohal, 45 years, R/o Achampet village and Mandal, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1. The Joint Collector, Guntur, Guntur District and another. .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.24998 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in passing orders in EC Act Case No.191/2009-S7 dated 04.11.2009 directing the 2nd respondent to take delivery of the seized stocks and distribute the same to the needy card-holders at Government notified Fair Price Shop dealers, as being illegal and arbitrary and consequently set aside the order of the 1st respondent in EC Act Case No.191/2009-S7 dated 04.11.2009. The petitioner is working as a Clerk in M/s Balaji rice Traders, Achampet, Guntur District. On 15.09.2009, the officials of vigilance and Enforcement department and MPDO stopped the lorry bearing No. A.P 20T 6688 near Saibaba temple, Achampet, on the ground that the lorry is having 259 bags of PDS rice which were illegally transporting to Nizamabad and that the officials seized the lorry along with PDS rice under a cover of panchanama. Pursuant thereto, on the basis of the report furnished by the officials, the 1st respondent initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act and issued a show cause notice under Section 6-B of the E.C. Act calling for explanation of the petitioner and also directed the petitioner to appear before him on 18.11.2009. Subsequently, the 1st respondent passed an order in E.C. Act Case No.191/2009-S7 dated 04.11.2009 directing the 2nd respondent to take delivery of the seized stocks from the custodian and distribute the same to the card-holders at Government notified fair price shop dealers and remit the sale proceeds under revenue deposit. Hence the present writ petition. Heard both sides. Having directed the petitioner to appear before him on 18.11.2009, the 1st respondent ought not to have ordered distribution of the said seized stock. The action of the 1st respondent, without conducting open auction for the seized stock, simply directing the 2nd respondent to distribute the same to the card holders, is not correct. Since the proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act are very much pending before the 1st respondent, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of without going into the merits of the case. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent-Joint Collector to complete the proceedings pending before him under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act 1955 and pass necessary orders thereon, as early as possible, preferably on 18.11.2009, or within a period of two weeks thereafter. Pending consideration of the said proceedings, the seized stocks shall not be sold. No order as to costs. ___________________________ (GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J) 17-11-2009 Gsn.