The Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy Writ Petition No.32382 of 2014 Dated 29.10.2014 Between:
R.R.Enterprises Rep. by its Managing Director Andhavarapu Ravi Kumar And The Inspector, Regional Vigilance and Enforcement Officer, Srikakulam District and 2 others.
…Petitioner …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr.Aravala Rama Rao Counsel for the respondents: AGP for Civil Supplies (AP) The Court made the following:
Order:
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus to declare the seizure of oil worth Rs.3,25,928/-, and the consequential proceeding in SR.No.90/2014, dated 07-10-2014, of respondent No.2, whereunder he has directed respondent No.3 to sell the seized stock of oil in public auction, as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies representing the respondents.
The petitioner- firm pleaded that it is carrying on business in edible oils under license, which is valid up to 03-03-2015; that on 12-09-2014 at about 11.00 a.m., respondent No.1 and his staff inspected the petitioner’s business premises and seized the entire stock of palmolin oil lying in van bearing No.AP 30 X 0459 on the allegation that the same was being illegally transported to Orissa State. The petitioner averred that the entire consignment was, in fact, received from Adani Wilmar Limited, Kakinada, by transport through lorry bearing registration No.AP 26 Y 2349 under invoice, loading receipt and way bill and that after selling a part of the said consignment to its customers, the petitioner was loading the balance stock into lorry bearing registration No.AP 30 X 0459, during the course of which, the inspecting staff came and seized the stock. On 16-09-2014, the petitioner has submitted representation to respondent No.2 seeking release of the seized stock. However, by order, dated 07.10.2014, respondent No.2 has ordered for disposal of the seized stock through public auction.
Inasmuch as the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) are pending before respondent No.2, this Court is not inclined to pronounce upon the legality or otherwise of the impugned seizure. As the petitioner is willing to furnish bank guarantee for the seized stock and continued seizure of the stock causes diminution in its quality and value, it would be in the interests of justice that the seized stock is released to the petitioner instead of the same being permitted to be sold in public auction.
In the light of the above discussion, the proceeding in SR.No.90/2014, dated 07-10-2014, of respondent No.2, is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to release the seized stock to the petitioner on its furnishing bank guarantee for the sum of Rs.3,25,928/-, which shall be subject to the result of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act pending before him.
Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
As a sequel, WPMP.No.40480 of 2014, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous.
(C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy, J) Dt: 29th October, 2014
LUR