The High Court may direct the continued supply of paddy for Custom Milling pending a statutory appeal against a confiscation order under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, provided such supply remains subject to the final outcome of the appeal and existing regulatory conditions.

ORDER :

Ravi Cheemalapati, J.

Questioning the action of respondent authorities in not supplying paddy to the petitioner for Custom Milling Rice (CMR) for the Rabi Marketing Season 2024-25, Writ Petition No.9446 of 2025 has been filed.

2. Challenging the order dated 30.04.2025 passed by respondent No.2, bearing Ref.No.CS1/17/RJY/2025 under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 with an intention to flout the orders of this Court dated 25.04.2025 in Writ Petition No.9446 of 2025, Writ petition No.13234 of 2025 has been filed.

3. Questioning the action of respondents in not supplying paddy to the petitioners for Custom Milling Rice (CMR), Writ Petition No.28564 of 2025 has been filed.

4. Contempt Case No.3240 of 2025 is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the order dated 16.10.2025 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.28564 of 2025.

5. The brief facts of the aforesaid cases are that:

i) Petitioner No.2 is the Managing Director of petitioner No.1 company and he entered into an agreement with respondent No.5 for supply of rice under the Custom Milling Rice scheme. During the course of inspection conducted at the premises of petitioner No.1, based on certain allegations that the petitioners were involved in procuring PDS rice and recycling the same as CMR to the Government, the officials, upon finding certain discrepancies, seized stock containing 2133 kgs of PDS rice allegedly placed by the henchmen of unofficial respondent i.e, respondent No.9 and 29,320 kgs of CMR rice along with a vehicle, all valued at Rs.24,46,838/-.

ii) The Tahsildar (CS) lodged a report as against the petitioner and seven others and the same were registered as FIR No.8 0f 2025, under Section 318 (4) r/w 3(5) of BNS read with Section 7(1) of Essential Commodities Act. Pursuant thereto, the Sub-Inspector of Police has filed charge sheet before the Court of Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-II Additional Judicial I Class Magistrate, Kovvuru stating that the allegations against accused Nos.1 to 3 and 5 to 7 are not established.

iii) On 09.01.2025, respondent No.2 (Collector (CS)) issued a show cause notice under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), to which the petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation. Subsequently, respondent No.2 passed an order dated 24.02.2025 observing that the seized rice was not PDS rice, but CMR rice and thereby levied a penalty of Rs.20,000/- for keeping the lorry in the premises without any prior permission and directed respondent No.7 to release the seized CMR rice of 293.20 quintals with immediate effect.

iv) While the things stood thus, respondent No.6 issued a Circular vide Ref.No.CS.04/2025 dated 29.03.2025 informing about the paddy procurement operations for the Rabi Marketing Season 2024-25. Having come to know that the petitioner’s name would not be reflected in the Rythu Seva Kendras (RSK) for supply of paddy for CMR purposes, the petitioners submitted a representation on 01.04.2025 to respondent No.2 requesting them to supply paddy for the CMR purposes and enable it to continue its milling operations. As no action was taken by the respondents on the representation, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.9446 of 2025.

v) Pursuant to filing of the said Writ Petition, the representation made by the petitioners on 01.04.2025 was rejected vide order dated 17.04.2025 on the ground that the petitioners had already been blacklisted, even though the proceedings under Section 6A of Essential Commodities Act were still pending. Exce