-IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 14501 of 2009 Between: Sakthi Sai Traders, 28/19, Second Narayanan Street, Chennai, Rep. by its Proprietor K. Bhaskaran, S/o. Narayan, Aged 45 years. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Guntur. 2 The Tahsildar, Nekarikallu, Guntur District. 3 The District Manager, APSCS Limited, Guntur, Guntur District. ..RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : O R D E R: This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare seizure of 150 quintals of rice, while it was being transported through lorry bearing registration No.AP 07W 9186 near Piduguralla-Karampudi road of Nekarikallu Village and Mandal, Guntur District, on 10-06- 2009. The petitioner also questioned order dated 08-07-2009 of respondent No.1. Heard Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. On the date above mentioned, the lorry along with rice was seized on suspicion that the rice meant for public distribution system in the State of Andhra Pradesh was being transported. The petitioner claimed to have made an application for release before respondent No.1. However, by order, dated 08-07-2009, the rice was directed to be sold through public distribution system. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner sold the consignment to a trader in Vashi, New Mumbai and raised a bill in respect thereof. He also submitted that proper endorsements were made by Bheemunivaripalem Check Post, Tada Mandal, Nellore District at the time of entry of the lorry with the stock into the State of Andhra Pradesh. The learned counsel further placed reliance on the analysis report of the District Manager, Andhra Pradesh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Guntur, which shows that the rice samples are classified as Grade-A variety. The learned counsel, therefore, submitted that there is no justification for seizing the rice on the suspicion that the same is meant for public distribution system. Having carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the above aspects raised by the learned counsel are required to be examined and decided by respondent No.1 in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”). For the time being, it requires to be noted that the petitioner’s plea is, prima facie, supported by some documents, the authenticity of which can be examined in the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. However, in the ultimate success of the petitioner in the said proceedings, it will suffer serious prejudice if the rice is permitted to be distributed through public distribution system, the rice will be distributed at a highly subsidized cost. Therefore, the interests of justice would be met if the seized stock is directed to be sold in open auction to be held by the District Manager-respondent No.3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, by modifying order dated 08-07-2009, to the effect that the seized stock shall be sold in open auction by respondent No.3. He shall deposit the sale proceeds with respondent No.1, which shall be subject to the result of the pending proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act before him. Respondent No.1 is directed to complete the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP No.19017 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J Dated 21st July, 2009 vrn