THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI WRIT PETITION No. 20515 of 2011 ORAL ORDER Heard Sri V.H.V.R.R. Swamy, learned counsel representing Sri Thimmadi Sudhakar Reddy and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. At the request of both the counsel, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage. On 13.7.2011, the Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Bheemunipatnam Mandal along with other staff inspected the mill premises of the petitioner and found a vehicle bearing registration No. AP 31 TU 4696 unloading rice in the mill. The Inspecting Officer verified the Stock Registers and found variation in the stock of rice. Therefore, he seized the stock alleging violation of the provisions of A.P. Scheduled Commodities (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008. A report to that effect under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act was laid before the 2nd Respondent-District Collector, Visakhapatnam District. The petitioner approached the 2nd respondent by filing application dated 16.7.2011 seeking release of the seized stocks contending that he had not committed any irregularity either in the maintenance of the records or in maintaining the stock. As the said application has been kept pending, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. During the course of hearing Mr. V.H.V.R.R. Swamy submits that inasmuch as the 2nd respondent has taken cognizance of the report for enquiry under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, the 2nd respondent be directed to conduct the enquiry and finalize the same within the time frame and in the meanwhile to direct the respondents not to sell the seized stock. Undoubtedly the stock was seized on 13.7.2011. The 2nd respondent has taken cognizance of the report for conducting enquiry into the allegations made against the petitioner under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act. Matters of this nature have to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible in order to avoid loss and prejudice to the parties concerned. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and the limited grievance presented seeking conclusion of enquiry, it is appropriate to direct the 2nd respondent to conclude the enquiry within a time frame. Accordingly, the respondent No.2 is directed to conclude the enquiry by passing appropriate orders in accordance with law pursuant to the 6-A report submitted by the 1st respondent as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till final orders are passed by the 2nd respondent on the application of the petitioner dated 16.7.2011, the seized stocks shall not be sold. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. ___________________ 21.7.2011 CHV