ORDER :

This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents No.4 and 5 i.e., Enforcement Director and Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct the enquiry and investigation against the 6th respondent and to submit report to this Court.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner Society registered under the Societies Act and its aims and objectives is that to provide corruption free society to the common people. From the date of inception of the society, the society and its members are doing the same prospects and having good reputation in and around. While the things stood thus, on 13.3.2014 the 3rd respondent herein intercepted the lorry and seized the rice along with lorry on the allegation that the lorry driver is failed to produce Civil supply Permit or any consignment to transport the rice 170 qtls from Saroornagar, Rangareddy District to Dharmabad, Maharashtra State through Adilabad District and conducted panchanama dated 13.3.2014 and seized the 170 qtls of rice worth of Rs.3,72,047/- and the 3rd respondent herein not stated anything about the costs of the lorry and registered a case under Section 6A of the E.C Act 1955 and handed over the rice of the In- charge, MLAs Point, Mudole Mandal, Adilabad District and kept the lorry at PS Basara for safe custody until further orders from the 2nd respondent herein. It is further stated that the 3rd respondent had issued notification for conducting the general elections in State of A.P and issued schedule for nominations. Likewise, the 6th respondent, who is resident of Hyderabad have submitted his affidavit under Form No.26 for Rayadurg Assembly Constituency and submitted his details by way of affidavit stating that he is a candidate of Telugu Desam Party which is a recognized State Party in the State of A.P and also he submitted his Pan card details and also he submitted the income and expenditure and also details of the assets and liabilities. It is further submits that basing on the affidavit filed by the 6th respondent before the 3rd respondent election commission, it clearly shows that the 6th respondent is holding properties disproportionately and enjoying the same, but at the time of filing the returns before the Income Tax department he failed to show the entire details of the properties. But the 6th respondent has shown his income is Rs.5 lakhs and rest of the properties shown is in dispute. But originally the 6th respondent had enjoying the said properties, but in the election affidavit he is showing the same as disputed properties and future income. It clearly shows that the 6th respondent is small income of Rs.5 lakhs, how the 6th respondent earns crores of rupees.

Hence the present writ petition.

3. Heard Sri Manikanta, learned counsel representing Mr. Rajesh Maddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.

4. On hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after issuance of notification by the 3rd respondent for conducting general elections in the State of A.P., the 6th respondent has submitted his affidavit under Form No.26 for Rayadurg Assembly Constituency and also submitted his income and expenditure details along with other details. He submits that, as seen from the bank accounts of the 6th respondent, shares and other movable properties were shown as Rs.4,59,77,004/- and that the details of immovable properties shown as Rs.5,86,55,800/- and likewise his wife is having in her account Rs.16,86,73,500/- and also the liabilities of 6th respondent is Rs.2,01,01,836/- and the value details of the properties which are in dispute are Rs.6781,05,18,000 /-. It clearly shows that the 6th respondent is holding properties disproportionately and enjoying the same but at the time of filing returns before the Income Tax department, he failed to show the entire details of the properties. He had only shown his income as Rs.5 lakhs. If he is having income of Rs.5 lakhs how the 6th