THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18961 OF 2010 Dated: 04-08-2010 Between: Neetheti Rama Murthy ... PETITIONER AND The Collector, Visakhapatnam District and another ... RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 18961 OF 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner questions the action of the 2nd respondent in seizing 358.75 quintals of rice and 15.20 quintals of broken rice from his business premises on 22-07-2010. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a licensee to deal in food grains under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Commodities Dealers (Licensing, Storage and Regulation) Order, 2008. Alleging that he has stored the commodities in unlicensed premises, that he has stored more quantity than permitted under the Andhra Pradesh State Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2008 (for short, ‘the Control Order’) and that there are variations in the stocks when compared to the ground balance, the impugned order is passed by the 2nd respondent seizing the aforesaid quantities of rice and broken rice. It is stated that in view of submission of the seizure report, the matter is before the 1st respondent under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). The petitioner approached the 1st respondent by filing a petition on 28-07- 2010 for release of the seized stocks. In this writ petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that without considering his petition, the respondents are taking steps to sell the seized stock. It is also his case that the very seizure is illegal and there is no violation of the provisions of the Control Order or the conditions of licence. Whether the allegations made against the petitioner are true or not is a matter of enquiry by the 1st respondent under Section 6-A of the Act. Therefore, this Court cannot examine the explanation offered by the petitioner on the allegations made against him. In any event, since it is stated that the petitioner has already moved the 1st respondent by way of a petition for release of the seized stock and no orders are passed on the same, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the 1st respondent to consider the petition filed by the petitioner on 28-07-2010 and pass appropriate orders thereon within a period of two weeks from today. The respondents are also directed not to sell the seized stock till appropriate decision is taken by the 1st respondent and the same is communicated to the petitioner. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 04-08-2010 ks Note: Operative portion by wire at party’s costs. B/O ks