THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.39944 of 2014 Between:
Y.Chandra Sekhar and
DATE: 27.12.2014
…Petitioner State of Andhra Pradesh and others …Respondents COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER : SRI BHASKAR FOR SRI D.V.N.ACHARYA COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS : AGP FOR AGRICULTURE (AP) THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.39944 of 2014
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.4 in seizing the entire stock of fertilizers from the petitioner’s shop though the alleged contravention is in respect of only Urea as illegal and arbitrary.
I have heard Sri Bhaskar, learned counsel representing Sri D.V.N.Acharya, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Agriculture.
The petitioner is a dealer in fertilizers. His shop was inspected by the vigilance officials on 08.09.2014. Following the said inspection, 659 bags of fertilizers of different varieties worth Rs.4,05,952/- were seized under panchanama, dated 08.09.2014. The seized fertilizers include 116 bags of Urea. Based on the seizure report, proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) appeared to have been initiated by respondent No.4. The petitioner has filed an application for release of the seized fertilizers. Respondent No.2 vide proceedings Rc.CS1/141/2014, dated 15.10.2014, styled as notice, has directed the petitioner to furnish bank guarantee for a sum of Rs.1,01,488/- and PSB, which obviously means Personal Security Bond, for an amount of Rs.4,05,952/- as a condition for release of the seized stock.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that seizure of all the fertilizers is illegal for the reason that under Clause 28(d) of the Fertilizer (Control) Order, 1985, the inspector is entitled to seize or detain any fertilizers in respect of which he has reason to believe a contravention of the Control Order has been or is attempted to be committed. He has invited the Court’s attention to the contents of the panchanama wherein it is mentioned that at the time of inspection, one farmer, by name, Krishna, Gashakal Village has informed the inspecting officials that the petitioner has sold two bags of Urea @ Rs.360/- each and that no receipt was given. It is further mentioned that with respect to the Urea, D-Form licence did not include the said item and the entries in the stock register were not made up to date. It is also mentioned that the petitioner has indulged in sale of Urea at higher price than the prescribed price, has not included it in ‘O’ Form, has not issued bills and has not maintained stock records etc.
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the allegation of contravention levelled against the petitioner is confined only to the Urea and the inspecting officials have not disclosed the reasons for the seizure of 8 other varieties of fertilizers in the panchanama.
In that view of the matter, seizure of fertilizers as mentioned in the panchanama at Sl.Nos.2 to 9 is declared as illegal. Respondent No.2 is directed to release these fertilizers forthwith to the petitioner unconditionally. As regards 116 bags of Urea, which is shown to be worth Rs.32,944/-, respondent No.2 is directed to release the same to the petitioner on his furnishing bank guarantee for the said sum, which shall be subject to the proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of the Act.
The Writ Petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
As a sequel to disposal of main petition, WPMP.No.50089 of 2014 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 27th DECEMBER, 2014.
kvni