HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19251 of 2010 Dated: 06-08-2010 Between: Miryala Yethirajulu. … Petitioner And The Joint Collector (CS wing), Prakasam District & another. … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.19251 of 2010 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents. Petitioner is the owner of the lorry bearing No.AP-26- X-0044. When it was transporting 200 quintals of rejected rice from FCI godown, same was intercepted and seized at Kandukur. It is the case of the petitioner that originally, the said rice was sent by a miller/dealer, who is the owner of ‘Pardhasarathi Rice Mill’, Cumbum, to the FCI godown, but as the said rice was rejected at the FCI godown due to poor quality and lack of polish, the owner of the rice, instead of taking it all the way to Cumbum, wanted to get the rice polished at Kandukur. It is stated that, as the transportation is undertaken by the petitioner in a bona fide manner, and as the stock was meant for supplies to FCI, it cannot be treated as unauthorised transportation. When the petitioner, who is the owner of the vehicle, has filed an application before the Collector, by the impugned order, dated 28.07.2010, passed in Proceedings Rc.CS1/6A/138/2010, the Collector has ordered for release of vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee for Rs.3,60,000/-, which is equivalent to the value of the entire stock seized, for a period of three years, pending 6-A proceedings. With regard to the allegations made against the petitioner, it is a matter for inquiry under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Normally, even if the allegations made against the petitioner are proved, the vehicle can maximum be confiscated only to the extent of the value of the seized stock, but however, in this case, it is to be seen that even as per the recitals of panchanama, when the stock was initially taken to FCI godowns for the purpose of giving mill levy, but when the same was rejected, it was being transported to Kandukur for the purpose of getting such rice polished further, so as to meet the quality standards. In that view of the matter, it is a fit case to modify the conditions imposed by the 1st respondent for release of the vehicle in question. For the aforesaid reasons, the order of the 1st respondent, dated 28.07.2010, passed in Proceedings Rc.CS1/6A/138/2010, is set aside to the extent of release of the lorry is concerned, with a direction to the respondents to release the lorry bearing No.AP-26-X- 0044 to the petitioner on furnishing a bank guarantee for an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- for a period of one year, and with a further condition that petitioner shall file a written undertaking before the 1st respondent, to the effect that he will not alienate or transfer the vehicle in favour of any third party, till appropriate final orders are passed in 6-A proceedings. There shall be a further direction to the respondents to complete the inquiry and pass appropriate final orders within a period of six 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 6th August 2010 Note: Furnish C.C. by tomorrow. (b/o) ajr