THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16466 of 2009 DATE:12.08.2009 Between: G. Ramesh and another ... Petitioners and The Joint Collector (C.S.)-II, R.R. District and another ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16466 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking a Writ of Mandamus to set aside the panchanama conducted by 2nd respondent on 29.07.2009 for seizure of rice, and consequently, to direct the respondents to release the seized rice. 2. The case of the petitioners is that 1st petitioner is brother-in-law of 2nd petitioner. They are carrying on business in food-grains in whole sale, under valid licences, at door Nos.1-17/2 & 1-114 and 1-75/1, R.T.C. Colony, Medchal village, R.R. District, respectively. One Mr. G.Naveen is assisting them in their absence. While so, on 29.07.2009, the Assistant Supply Officer, R.R. District - 2nd respondent has inspected the said shops, in their absence, seized 228.75 quintals of rice, on the allegation that they contravened clause 3(i) of the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (L, S & R) Order, 2008, under cover of panchanama dated 29.07.2009, and later reported the matter to the Joint Collector (C.S.)-II, R.R. District - 1st respondent, who in turn, initiated proceedings against them, under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'). Questioning the same, they have submitted objection petitions separately before the 1st respondent, on 01.08.2009, seeking release of the seized rice, but the 1st respondent has not passed any order on their objection petitions so far. Aggrieved by the same, they filed this writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the 2nd respondent has inspected the shops of the petitioners, in their absence, and without giving an opportunity to produce the relevant records, registers and licences, seized the rice, that the very seizure of rice is contrary to the provisions of the A.P. Scheduled Commodities Dealers (L,S & R) Order, 2009, that though the petitioners filed objections petitions separately before the 1st respondent seeking release of the seized rice, the 1st respondent has not passed any order on the objection petitions so far, and that therefore, prays to allow this writ petition. 5. Having considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel and having regard to the fact that the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act have already been initiated by the 1st respondent, this court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to decide the 6-A proceedings, at the earliest. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission, directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the seized stocks shall not be sold. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 12th August, 2009 CBS THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.16466 of 2009 (Disposed of) 12th August, 2009 CBS