M/s.Pavanasutha Rice Depot v. District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Counsel for the Petitioner : MR. V.RAVI KIRAN RAO Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES T he Court made t he following : T HE HON’BL E Ms. JUST ICE G. ROHINI WRIT PET IT ION No.23536 OF 2008
ORDER :
Operative part
This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the 3rd respondent in seizing the stocks namely (1) BPT Rice 45.50 quintals (2) HMT Rice 4.50 quintals (3) Erra Mallelu 9.00 quintals and (4) Basmathi 0.75 quintals all worth Rs.1,17,975/- under the cover of Panchanama, dated 22.10.2008 as arbitrary and illegal. Though various contentions have been raised by the petitioner assailing the seizure, since the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, ‘E.C. Act, 1955’) is pending, without expressing any opinion on merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to proceed with the enquiry under Section 6-A of the E.C. Act, 1955 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Till such time, there shall be stay of sale of the seized stock. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 29.10.2008 Note:- Operative portion by wire at party’s costs. (B/o)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: merits, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Essential Commodities Act, 1955; E.C. Act, 1955.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.