THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.25418 of 2014 Between:
Dated 09th October, 2014 M/s.Vasavi Par Boiled Industry and Rice Mill And …Petitioner The Government of Telangana, rep.by its Prl.Secretary, Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others …Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.H.V.R.R.Swamy Counsel for the respondents: GP for Civil Supplies (TG) The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare seizure of 206 quintals of rice under panchanama, dated 07.08.2014, as illegal and void.
I have heard Sri V.H.V.R.R.Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.
The petitioner is a rice mill. On 07.08.2014, the Vigilance and Enforcement Officials led by the DSP, Inspector of Police and the Tahasildar inspected the petitioner-mill on information that the rice meant for public distribution was illegally stored. A panchanama was prepared following the inspection, wherein it is alleged that the owner of the mill was not present during the inspection, that the mill was running and that the clerk of the mill failed to produce the stock register, licence and other registers. It is further alleged that there was a stock about 206 quintals of rice and that 50 bags had FCI tags, based on which it was believed that the said rice was meant for public distribution. It is also alleged that the enquires with the clerk revealed that on 14.07.2013, the civil supplies officials inspected the mill and seized 324 quintals of rice, that out of the said stock 170 quintals of rice was handed over to MLS point and the balance rice was handed over to one Katta Industries, Wanaparthy. It is further alleged that presently the mill is being run without permission and that the owner of the mill is running the same by frequently indulging in irregularities. On the said allegations, stock of 206 quintals of rice was seized under the panchanama.
Though time was granted on three occasions, no counter affidavit is filed by the respondents.
At the hearing, Sri V.H.V.R.R.Swamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that though the seizure was effected as far back as 07.08.2014, till today no proceedings have been initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’). The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, on instructions, submitted that till now no seizure report was received under Section 6-A of the Act by respondent No.2.
Under Section 6-A of the Act, where any essential commodity is seized in pursuance of an order made under Section 3 in relation thereto, a report of such seizure shall without unreasonable delay be made to the Collector of the District or the Presidency town in which such essential commodity is seized and whether or not prosecution is instituted for the contravention of such order, the Collector may if he thinks it expedient so to do direct the essential commodity so seized to be produced for inspection before him for the purpose of passing an order of confiscation of such seized essential commodity.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations contained in the panchanama are wholly false and that the petitioner’s licence was valid upto 31.03.2014 and that on 10.03.2014 itself, it made an application for renewal of the licence. The petitioner has filed a copy of the challan evidencing payment of licence fee of Rs.200/- on 10.03.2014 towards the renewal of the licence.
Ordinarily, this Court would not intervene in cases of seizure of the essential commodities where due procedure is followed. Here is a case where admittedly, the seizure report has not been made to respondent No.2 though more than two months had elapsed from the date of seizure. As noted hereinbefore, such a seizure report shall be made “without reasonable delay”. No explanation is forthcoming from the respondents for not making the seizure report. In this admitted fact situation, this Court has no option other than declaring that the very seizure of 206 quintals of rice made under panchanama, dated 07.08.2014, is wholly illegal and the same cannot be sustained.
The writ petition is accordingly allowed as prayed for. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to release the seized stock to the petitioner forthwith.
As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, W.P.M.P.No.31794 of 2014 shall stand disposed of as infructuous.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 09th October, 2014
VGB