i IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAV (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B. S. BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 20966 OF 2024 Between; Md. Khadeer, S/o. Md. Jamaluddin, Aged 50 years, Owner of Vehicle bearing No. TS05UE6382, R/o. D.No.2-12, Main Road, Peddavoora, Peddavoora Mandal, Nalgonda District, Telangana State. ...PETITIONER AND 1. The State of AP, Rep. by its Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Collector (CS), Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 3. The Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Macharla, Palandu District. 4. The Station House Officer, Durgi P.S., Palnadu District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 3'^'^ respondent in seizing Ashok Leyland Bada Dost bearing No. TS05UE6382 and registering a case vide Crime No. 158/2Q22, on the file of 4^^ respondent P.S. as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Orders made there under and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of the illegal seizure. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the seized Ashok Leyland Bada Dost bearing No. TS05UE6382 to the petitioner, pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER APHC010411612024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3311] Monday the seventeenth day of March two thousand and twenty five Present THE HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE B S BHANUMATHI WRIT PETITION NO: 20966/2024 Between: Md Khadeer ...Petitioner and The State of AP and others Counsel for the petitioner: 1.V Sudhakar Reddy Counsel for the respondent(s): 1.GP for Home 2.GP for Civil Supplies The Court made the following ...Respondents ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: to declare the action of the 3'"' respondent in seizing Ashok Leyland Bada Dost bearing No. TS05UE6382 and registering a case vide Crime No. 158/2022, on the file of 4*'^ respondent P.S. as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the orders made there under and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of the illegal seizure”. 2 W.P.No.20966 of 2024 2. The case of the petitioner is briefly as follows: The petitioner is the owner of Ashok Leyland Bada Dost bearing No. TS05UE6382. The petitioner is eking out his livelihood by plying the said vehicle. On 22.09.2022, the vehicle of the petitioner was engaged by Rupavath Redya Naik of Nalgonda to transport raw rice from Miryalaguda of Telangana State to Durgi of Andhra Pradesh. Thereafter, the vehicle was not handed over by the said person to the petitioner. When the petitioner inquired about the same, he had informed that he had sent the vehicle to some place and it would be returned, however he later on disappeared and his whereabouts could not be traced by the petitioner. Finally, the petitioner came to know that the vehicle had been seized by the 3^^ respondent along with 80 bags of raw rice and had handed over to the Station House Officer, Durgi Police Station. The 4*^ respondent registered a case in Crime No.158 of 2022 under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Section 420 r/w 34 IPC. The 4^*^ respondent refused to release the vehicle as the name of the petitioner is not shown either in the mediatornama or FIR. The petitioner claims that it is not the PDS rice as per his enquiry and that even if it is PDS rice, it belongs to the State of Telangana and therefore, the 3'^^ respondent has no jurisdiction to seize the same. 3. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the seizure itself is illegal as the jurisdiction of rice is no longer within the purview of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 as it was taken out of the purview of the said Act by GSR 104(E) dated 15.02.2002 issued by the Government of India. In addition thereto, he further submitted that the 3'"^ respondent had no jurisdiction to seize the said rice, even if it is PDS rice, since it belongs to the state of Telangana as mentioned in the petition. He further submitted that since the vehicle was kept idle for two years and it is exposed to sun and rain, it gets damaged and it is necessary to release the vehicle without imposing any condition for the above said legal and factual position. 3 W.P.No.20966 of 2024 The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this High Court in M/s Vinayaka Agro Products Vs Inspector of Police, VC/CSD Khammam and another'' in support of his proposition that merely on transportation of essential commodity from one state through another, the authorities in another state cannot seize the vehicle carrying the commodity which does not belong to that state. 5. 6. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies submitted that the petitioner had filed a petition for release of the vehicle by the Joint Collector and an order dated 21.09.2024 was passed for release of the vehicle on the condition of furnishing bank guarantee for Rs.3,13,500/- from any nationalised bank and therefore, no order is required under this petition since the order of Joint Collector dated 21.09.2024 had not been challenged. He further submitted that there is no evidence, except the statement of the driver of the vehicle that the commodity belongs to the State of Telangana and moreover since the commodity of PDS rice cannot be identified as to whether it belongs to the State of Telangana or State of Andhra Pradesh, no such ground as is taken by the petitioner is tenable. Commodities Act, 1955 is a central legislation and therefore it can be enforced even within the State of Andhra Pradesh. He further submitted that the Essential In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that no such petition had been filed by the petitioner and therefore, he is not bound by the order of the Joint Collector. However, he further submitted that if this Court takes into consideration the order passed by the Joint Collector, the condition may be suitably modified as the petitioner cannot furnish security for the amount specified by Joint Collector as the petitioner is a poor person and eking out livelihood by plying the vehicle and moreover the vehicle got damaged as it was kept idle for a long period and its value would not be the same as mentioned in the order of Joint Collector. 7. ^ 1996 CrI Law Journal 2890 4 W.P.No.20966 of 202-^^^ The learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that it is a matter of enquiry as to whether the rice is PDS rice or not or whether it belongs to the State of Telangana or the State of Andhra Pradesh and therefore, it cannot be decided at this juncture. 8. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the complaint given to the police itself indicates that the vehicle started from Miryalaguda which is situated within the State of Telangana to Durgi within the State of Andhra Pradesh and therefore, no further proof is required. That apart, he submitted that there is no requirement to obtain any licence or permit for transportation of rice in view of delisting rice from the essential commodities since 2015. 9. As the petitioner is seeking release of the vehicle pending enquiry, it is premature to make any comments on the legality of seizure basing on the contention that it pertains to the State of Telangana. As the petitioner failed to file any reply affidavit to the counter affidavit, the fact that an application was filed before the Joint Collector for release of the vehicle and an order being passed thereon cannot be ignored. There cannot be two orders from two authorities in respect of the very same relief. 10. Therefore, in view of the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to modify the order of Joint Collector for release of the vehicle, the writ petition is disposed of directing the release of Ashok Leyland Bada Dost bearing No. TS05UE6382 to the petitioner on furnishing personal or 3^^ party’s immovable property as security for the value of Rs.3,13,500/- to the satisfaction of the 4*^ respondent. The petitioner shall further undertake before the 4*^ respondent that the physical condition of the vehicle would not be altered or that the vehicle would not be alienated or transferred to any third party subjected to change by him pending the proceedings under On accepting the 11. Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 5 W.P.No.20966 of 2024 immovable property as security, the respondent shall inform forthwith the same to the concerned Registrar/Sub-Registrar for record purpose. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. Sd/- N. NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SE OFFICER To. 1. The Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Affairs Department State of AP, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Collector (CS), Narasaraopet, Palnadu District. 3. The Civil Supplies Deputy Tahsildar, Macharla, Palandu District. 4. The Station House Officer, Durgi P.S., Palnadu District. 5. One CC to Sri V. Sudhakar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] Supplies, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. 7. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 8. Three C.D. Copies. Cnr % HIGH COURT DATED; 17/03/2025 ORDER WP.No.20966 of 2024 anoS^^ 5 27 MAR 2025 ^ ^ . Current Section Oil DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS