Back
2022 Supreme(AP) 413
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
AVULA SWAROOPA – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH – Respondent
WRIT PETITION NO.38332 of 2022
Decided on : 25-11-2022
Subject
Writ Petition - Essential Commodities Act
Act Referred
Headnote
Essential Commodities Act, 1955 - Section 6-A - Fact that subsequent to seizure of rice and vehicle, a proceedings under Section 6-A of Essential Commodities Act, are initiated before 2nd Respondent, who is competent authority - Held, Considering facts and circumstances of case and in light of latest order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Onteru Bhaskar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department and others, 2022 SCC Online AP 348 in court considered opinion, It is appropriate and reasonable to direct 2nd Respondent to release seized stock along with vehicle in favour of petitioner on imposing certain condition, to protect interest of Respondents, pending disposal of the 6-A proceedings - Writ petition disposed of.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : V SUDHAKAR REDDY Adv.
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and perused the material available on record.
2. Having heard the respective counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is an admitted fact that subsequent to the seizure of the rice and vehicle, a proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, are initiated before the 2nd Respondent, who is the competent authority. The illegality and validity of the seizure has to be decided by the 2nd Respondent in 6-A proceedings. This Court is not inclined to interfere into the 6A proceedings.
3. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the latest order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in ‘Onteru Bhaskar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department and others’, 2022 SCC Online AP 348 in our considered opinion, it is appropriate and reasonable to direct the 2nd Respondent to release the seized stock along with the vehicle in favour of the petitioner on imposing certain condition, to protect the interest of the Respondents, pending disposal of the 6-A proceedings.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The interim order in Rc.B1.485/2022 dated_.11.2022 issued by the 2nd Respondent is hereby set aside.
(ii) The Respondents shall release the seized stock pursuant to the panchanama, dated 20.08.2022, in favour of the petitioner on condition of furnishing personal or third party immovable security property equivalent to the value of the seized stock, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) The Respondents shall release the Eicher Mini Lorry bearing No.AP 26 TD 3944 seized pursuant to the panchanama, dated 20.08.2022, in favour of the petitioner on condition of furnishing personal or third party immovable security property equivalent to the value of the seized stock in the said vehicle, within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iv) The Petitioner shall submit an undertaking stating that the seized vehicle shall not be alienated or mortgaged during pendency of the 6-A proceedings.
5. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.
