P.V. Sreenivasulu v. Chittoor District

The petitioner claims that he purchased 500 bags of rice (each bag weighing 50 Kgs.) from M/s.Lakshmi Tracing Company, Cheluru, Bagepally Taluq, Kolar District, Karnataka State. When he was transporting 249 bags of rice from Bagepally to Chintamani in Karnataka, the first respondent intercepted the lorry bearing No.AP- 04-U-3365 belonging to one Lakshma Reddy, on an allegation that the rice being transported in the lorry is meant for ‘food for work’ programme being implemented by the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Challenging the seizure of rice, the present writ petition is filed. This Court initially ordered notice after admitting the writ petition. As the respondents did not file any counter affidavit, this Court passed interim orders on 07.8.2002 in W.P.M.P.No.17937 of 2002 directing the respondents to release 249 bags of rice to the petitioner. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, it is stated that on 14.7.2002 at 2.00 P.M. at Cheluru to Chintamani road at Chendrayanpalle Cross, the first respondent along with the staff intercepted the lorry in question and arrested the driver and manager of rice.

420 bags of rice each weighing 50 Kgs. were also seized. A crime being Crime No.50 of 2002 under Section 7(1) of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (the Act, for brevity) was registered against the arrested persons and they were produced before the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thamballapalle. The seized material was handed over to the Mandal Revenue Officer, Pedda Tippa Samudram, Chittoor District. It is alleged that the petitioner, by diverting rice meant for ‘food for work’ programme, has violated the provisions of the Act and Control Orders issued under Section 3 of the said Act. It is also stated that the first respondent submitted a report to the second respondent for initiating proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri D.Vijayachandra Reddy, while denying various allegations made against the petitioner orally submits that pursuant to the orders of this Court, the rice seized was released.

In that view of the matter, instead of keeping the case pending, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order in accordance with law, if not already disposed of. The petitioner shall abide by the orders of the second respondent insofar as the seized stock is concerned. The writ petition, with the above observations and directions, is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________

(V.V.S.RAO,J)

23.06.2005 YS To 1 The Station House Officer, Pedda Tippa Samudram Police Station Chittoor District. 2 The Joint Collector, Chittoor District, Collectorate, Greemspet, Chittoor District. 3 One CC to MR.VIJAYA CHANDRA REDDY 4 Two C.D. Copies.