THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19232 of 2010 ORDER: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. In this writ petition, petitioner questioned the seizure of groundnut subsidized seed of 306 bags stocked in premises bearing door No.6/40 in Vajrakarur Village and Mandal, Anantapur District, on 24.06.2010, by the fourth respondent – Mandal Agricultural Officer, Vajrakarur, Anantapur. It is the case of the petitioner that the seized stock belongs to farmers, who are from surrounding villages and who stocked it for the purpose of converting the same into groundnut seed. It is alleged that making false allegations, the fourth respondent seized the aforesaid stock. Pursuant to such seizure, proceedings were initiated for confiscation of seized stock, by the second respondent – Joint Director of Agriculture, Anantapur, and thereby, show cause notice, dated –Nil- .07.2010 in Roc.No.B6/1653/2010, despatched on 23.07.2010, was issued to the petitioner to explain why the seized stock shall not be confiscated in exercise of powers under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). On 23.07.2010 itself, the first respondent ordered for interim disposal of the seized stock, as such, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition. When the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents that the seized stock was already sold and the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act are pending before the first respondent. As much as the seized commodity was already sold, no further direction can be issued by declaring the order for interim disposal of seized stock as illegal, at this stage. As it is stated that proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act are pending consideration, whether the petitioner has violated any of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Public Distribution System Control Order, 2008 framed under the Act is a matter to be examined by the authority under Section 6-A of the Act. In view of pendency of proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act before the first respondent, I deem it appropriate to direct the first respondent to decide the same and pass appropriate final order as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J 7th OCTOBER, 2010. kvni