HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 80, 82, 83 and 84 OF 2009 DATED 27th November, 2014.
BETWEEN M/s. Mahender Rice Industry, Shettipalem Vemulapalli mandal, Nalgonda District, rep. by its Managing Partner, Manchukonda Narsimha ….Petitioner in WP.No.80 of 2009 M/s. Mahateja Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., Shettipalem, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District, Rep. by its MD Manchukonda Narsimha ….Petitioner in WP.No. 82 of 2009 M/s. Maharshi Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., Shettipalem, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District Rep. by its MD Gudipati Srinivas ….Petitioner in WP.No. 83 of 2009 M/s. Miryalaguda rice Industries Pvt Ltd., Sagar Road, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District Rep. by its MD Ranga Ranzith Kumar …Petitioner in WP.No. 84 of 2009.
And The Commissioner of Civil Supplies, Government of AP, Hyderabad and ors …Respondents in all WPs.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION Nos. 80, 82, 83 and 84 OF 2009
COMMON ORDER:
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
These four Writ Petitions are being disposed of by this common order in view challenge made to the proceedings of the first respondent dated 2.1.2009 directing sale of preferred varieties of rice after seizure and purchase thereon and conversion as rice.
Petitioners are the rice millers. They have been purchasing the paddy from the market yards as well as from the ryots by paying minimum support price as fixed by the Government from time to time. They have been supplying levy rice to the Food Corporation of India as per rules. As per A.P. Rice Procurement (Levy) Order, 1984, 75% of resultant rice of paddy purchased is to be given to the Food Corporation of India and the remaining 25% resultant rice would be permitted to be sold by the petitioners as levy free rice. The State Government has evolved its policy vide G.O.Ms.No.38, dated 24.09.2007 for kharif marketing season 2007-08. As per the said policy, the millers in the entire State have to deliver 42.00 lakhs M.T.S. of raw rice and 20.00 lakhs M.T.S. of boiled rice totally 62.00 lakhs M.T.S. of rice as target under mill levy for delivery to Food Corporation of India and subsequently it was revised to 68.00 lakhs M.T.S. The first respondent should fix district wise procurement expectations for delivery under mill levy to the Food Corporation of India depending upon the production of paddy/rice milling capacity and past performance in consultation with the representatives of the A.P. Rice Millers Association, Food Corporation of India and State Civil Supplies Corporation. In respect of Nalgonda District, a target of 2,09,173 M.T.S. of raw rice, 5,56,648 M.T.S. of boiled rice totally 7,76,821 M.T.S. of target expectation has been fixed. Out of the said quantity, nearly 99% of raw rice has been delivered. While so, the respondents along with vigilance and enforcement officials have raided the petitioners-mills on 19.08.2008 and seized certain stocks by conducting panchanama. Thereafter the second respondent issued proceedings dated 21.8.2008 releasing the seized stocks in favour of the District Manager, A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation for disposal under Public Distribution System (PDS) in respect of rice and resultant rice out of paddy and in respect of broken rice through public auction. Section 6- A proceedings were initiated in respect of the stocks seized in the raids conducted on 19.8.2008. The petitioners submitted their explanations and thereafter final orders were passed by the second respondent on 29.12.2008. Challenging the same, the petitioners preferred Criminal Appeals and the same are pending adjudication before the competent Court.
While so, the first respondent issued proceedings dated 02.01.2009 directing the petitioners-rice millers to undertake immediate milling of superfine variety of paddy and deliver the resultant raw rice t at the Civil Supplies godowns in Hyderabad/ Ranga Reddy District. Challenging the said proceedings, the present Writ Petitions were filed.
This Court by order dated 01.01.2009 suspended the proceedings dated 2.1.2009 of the first respondent. By virtue of the said order, direction of the first respondent could not be carried out.
As already stated above, pursuant to the raids conducted on the petitioners-mills on 19.08.2008, Section 6-A proceedings were initiated and thereafter final orders were passed by the second respondent. The petitioners preferred Criminal Appeals challenging the said order and they are pending. However, the present issue relates to the proceedings issued by the first respondent directing the third respondent to see that preferred varieties of FAQ rice should be sold to the A.P. State Civil Supplies Corporation at the godowns points in twin cities and Urban areas of Ranga Reddy district at Rs.1700/- per quintal which includes transportation and handling charges. The third respondent shall issue special permits to the millers concerned in the format already communicated for delivering the preferred varieties of FAQ rice derived out of seized stocks at the Civil Supplies Godowns in the twin cities of Hyderabad and urban areas of Ranga Reddy District and the Collector (CS) of East Godavari, West Godavari, Nalgonda, Ranga Redy and Nizamabad districts were requested to ensure that at least 80 lorries of preferred varieties of rice are moved to Hyderabad/Secunderabad and Ranga Reddy district on daily basis for controlling the purchase of rice in the open market. Obviously the said directions were issued depending on the circumstances prevailing at that point of time. Since the said order was suspended by this Court way back in the year 2009, those circumstances do not prevail as of now. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no authority for the first respondent to issue such directions. However that issue cannot now be decided in the present cases. By virtue of the afflux of time the said directions became unworkable. Substantial proceedings challenging the orders of the second respondent are pending before the competent Court in appeals.
In the circumstances, the Writ Petitions are allowed setting aside the orders of the first respondent in CCS.Ref.No.P1(1)4779/2008, dated 2.1.2009.
Miscellaneous petitions pending consideration if any in the Writ Petitions shall stand closed in consequence. No order as to costs.
JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO DATED 27th November, 2014. Msnrx