WP(C) 5423/2003 BEFORE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY The petitioner no.1, which is a registered co-operative society register ed under the provisions of the Assam Co-operative Societies Act, 1949 and the pe titioner no.2, who is the Secretary of the said society by the present petition have prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to release the seized rice or to pay the value of such rice seized by the Inspector of F&CS, BI(EO), A ssam, camp - Dergaon on 28.10.2002 along with the vehicle bearing registration N o.NL-02/D-1907. Petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondent n os.2 to 4 to release the monthly quota of essential commodities, the allotment o f which had been stopped. I have heard Mrs B. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr J. H andique, learned state counsel appearing for the respondent nos.1, 5 & 6 and Mr AK Goswami, learned senior counsel for the respondent nos.2,3 & 4. In the writ petition, the petitioners have contended that pursuant to th e orders dated 20.9.2002 allotting 410.55 quintals of BPL rice and dated 7.10.20 02 allotting 64.75 quintals of Antyodaya Anna Yojana rice for each of the months of September-October, 2002 the entire quantity of rice was lifted by the petiti oner no.1 society from the godown of the Food Corporation of India on payment of the full value of the rice. According to the petitioners, the aforesaid quantit y of rice was loaded in several trucks including the vehicle No.NL-02/D-1907 for carriage to the office premises of the petitioner no.1 at Chokihola village, an d while the other vehicles have reached the destination, the aforesaid vehicle c arrying the BPL rice did not and, on enquiry, they came to know that the said ve hicle was seized by the officer of the Directorate of Bureau of Investigation (E conomic Offences) Assam, without, however, registering any case whatsoever. It i s further contended that they were subsequently informed of the seizure of the r ice valued at Rs.1 lakh (Rupees one lakh only) as well as the aforesaid vehicle by the Inspector of F&CS, BI(EO), Assam, camp - Dergaon, whereafter though they filed the representation dated 25.10.2002 before the Director of BIEO, Assam to release the rice, nothing has been done, though the entire quantity of rice was allotted by the competent authority and was lifted by the petitioners on payment of required price to the FCI, for distribution to the persons entitled to PDS i tems. Further case of the petitioners is that after such seizure, the respondent nos.2 to 4 have stopped allotting PDS items to them. Petitioners, therefore, fi led the present writ petition claiming the relief as noticed above. The respondent nos.2 to 4 in their affidavit-in-opposition have contende d that though initially in view of such seizure, the allotment of PDS items was stopped, the same was started pursuant to the order dated 7.10.2002 passed by th e Deputy Secretary(i/c), KAAC, Diphu and continued till the date of filing of th e affidavit-in-opposition. No affidavit-in-opposition has been filed by other respondents, includin g the Directorate of Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences) Assam, responde nt no.5, though the writ petition is pending for almost 7 years. In the absence of any affidavit or record, the statement made in the wri t petition including the value of the rice seized has to be accepted. It is the specific case of the petitioners that the 172.25 quintals of BPL rice carried in the vehicle No.NL-02/D-1907 was seized on 18.10.2002 by officials of the Directorate of Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences) Assam and no case has been registered on the basis of such seizure and neither the rice nor its v alue has been given to the petitioners. The petitioner no.1, who lifted the rice from the FCI godown by paying the price, cannot be deprived from the value of s uch rice. In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent nos.1, 5 and 6 to pay the value of the rice amounting to Rs.1 lakh (Rupees one lakh only) to the petitioner no.1, as the rice which was seized in the year 2003 if not already auctioned became unfit for human for consumptio n. Such amount shall be paid to the petitioner no.1, if not already paid, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order to be produced by the petitioner before the respondent no.5. Relating to the prayer for direction to the respondent nos.2 to 4 to continue al lotment of the PDS items, since the said respondents in the affidavit-in-opposit ion stated that they have started allotting such PDS item and continued to do so up-to the date of filing of the affidavit-in-opposition, the learned counsel fo r the petitioners has submitted that she does not press the prayer made in that regard. Writ petition is accordingly allowed to the extent indicated above. No c osts.