APHC010052522021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] MONDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3297/2021 Between: 1. V. SRINIVASULU REDDY,, S/O. LATE BALARAMI REDDY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, R/O. VATAMBEDU VILLAGE, TADA MANDAL, NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF A P, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR C S, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, CHITTOOR. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, SATYAVEDU, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SATYAVEDU POLICE STATION, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 and 3 in auctioning the 39 tons of rice seized from the petitioner 39 s godown in Tada Town of Nellore District by the 4th respondent on 9-12020 in favour of third parties as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the said respondents to release the said rice to the petitioner pending 6-A proceedings under E.C. Act to further declare the entire proceedings of seizure of rice and registration of Crime as illegal arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently return the money derived from sale of the seized 39 tons of the rice and also set - aside the FIR.No. 169/2020. dated 9-12-2020 on the file of satyavedu police Station, 2 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 Chittoor District Prayer is amended as per C.O.dt.01/02/2022 in IA.No.1/2022. and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to release 39 tons of rice seized from my godown in Tada Town, Nellore District on 09-12-2020 by the 4th respondent in favour of third parties and to release the said 39 tons of rice to the petitioner pending disposal of the Writ Petition, and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to direct the respondents herein to amend the prayer by adding "Or in the alternative direct the respondents to return the money obtained by sale of 39 tons of rice which is seized from my godown", in the above writ petition no 3297/2021 IA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to amend the prayer "to further declare the entire proceedings of seizure of rice and registration of Crime as illegal arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently return the money derived from sale of the seized 39 tons of the rice and also set-aside the FIR.No.169/2020, dated 9-12-2020 on the file of Satyavedu Police Station, Chittoor District" in the above Writ Petition No.3297 of 2021 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: 3 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 ORDER: The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue any writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents 2 and 3 in auctioning the 39 tons of rice seized from the petitioner’ s godown in Tada Town of Nellore District by the 4th respondent on 9-12020 in favour of third parties as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the said respondents to release the said rice to the petitioner pending 6-A proceedings under E.C. Act to further declare the entire proceedings of seizure of rice and registration of Crime as illegal arbitrary and without jurisdiction and consequently return the money derived from sale of the seized 39 tons of the rice and also set - aside the FIR.No.169/2020, dated 9-12-2020 on the file of Satyavedu Police Station, Chittoor District ….” 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: a) On 09.12.2020, at about 7.00 a.m., the Station House Officer, Satyavedu, Police Station along with his staff, while checking vehicles at Kalamanaidu check post, Satyavedu, intercepted a vehicle bearing No.TN- 18J-0829 carrying rice. Upon enquiry, the two persons in the said vehicle, informed that the rice found in the vehicle was purchased in the State of Tamilnadu and stored in the godowns of the petitioner and others at Tada Town, Nellore District, for sale in various towns and around Nellore City. b) Basing on the said information, the Station House Officer conducted a search of the petitioner’s godown at Tada Town and seized 39 metric tons of rice along with the vehicles in which the rice was being transported. Consequently, Crime No.169 of 2020, dated 09.12.2020 was registered by the Satyavedu Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 420 IPC 4 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 and Section 7(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, showing the petitioner herein as accused No.5. c) Pursuant thereto, the Station House Officer, Satyavedu Police Station i.e., 4th respondent herein requested the Tahsildar/3rd respondent to take further action with regard to the seized rice. Basing the same, proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act were initiated by the District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nellore District/2nd respondent herein. d) The grievance of the petitioner that, pending the said proceedings, the 3rd respondent, without issuing any notice to the petitioner, proceeded to auction the seized 39 tons of rice, which was purchased by various private individuals. e) The petitioner contends that the seized rice consists of boiled rice purchased from residents of Tamil Nadu and that there is no material or scientific proof to establish that the same constitutes PDS rice. It is further contended that even if any prohibition exists in the State of Tamil Nadu regarding the sale of PDS rice, the same cannot be enforced by the authorities of the State of Andhra Pradesh, who lack jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act. f) Therefore, the petitioner submits that the seizure and subsequent auction of the rice without issuance of notice and without affording an opportunity of hearing are arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice. Hence, the present writ petition came to be filed. 5 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 3. The 2nd respondent/ District Collector (CS), Chittoor District filed a counter affidavit stating that FIR No.169 of 2020 was registered on 11.12.2020 under Section 420 IPC and Section 7(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, and that 104 tons and 500 kilograms of boiled PDS rice along with seven vehicles were seized. The Sub-Inspector of Police reported the seized stocks and vehicles to the Tahsildar, Satyavedu, vide letter dated 10.12.2020. The Tahsildar, Satyavedu, issued a notice vide Roc.No.240/2020, dated 05.01.2021, giving wide publicity through tom-tom for public auction of the seized PDS rice and fixed the date of auction as 06.01.2021 at 11.00 a.m. in the premises of the Tahsildar’s office, Satyavedu. In spite of such notice, the petitioner did not turn up. 4. Respondent No.4/Station House Officer also filed a counter stating that on 10.12.2020, he handed over the case property i.e., seven vehicles and 104 tons and 1500 kgs of boiled PDS to the Tahsildar, Sathyavedu and obtained acknowledgement. During the course of investigation he received proceedings from the Collector (Civil Supplies), Chittoor, vide Roc. No.E4/450/2020, dated 04.01.2021, directing for release of the vehicles to their rightful owners under acknowledgement. Accordingly, the vehicles were released. 5. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies furnished a copy of instructions of the 3rd respondent/Tahsildar, Satyavedu vide Roc.No.162/2025, dated 08.10.2025 wherein it is stated that the Collector (Civil Supplies), Chittoor issued proceedings No.E4/450/2020, dated 04.01.2021, directing disposal of the 6 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 seized stock of 104 tons and 1500 kgs of boiled PDS rice through public auction. Accordingly, a public auction was held on 06.01.2021 in the premises of the Tahsildar’s office, Satyavedu, wherein one Sri B. Sekhar, S/o B. Munaswamy, of Nellatur Village, Varadaiahpalem Mandal, emerged as the highest bidder. The bid amounts of Rs.4,18,500/- and Rs.4,35,000/- were remitted through challan dated 02.03.2021. The seized stock was handed over to the highest bidder after keeping it in the MLS point, Satyavedu, under safe custody. 6. Heard Sri V.Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents and perused the material available on record. 7. For better appreciation of the case, Clause 19(f) of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018, is extracted hereunder: “19(f) Purchase of rice supplied / intended for supply through Public Distribution System either from the card holder or from the fair price shop dealer or any middle man or other source. Otherwise, such fair price shop dealer or middle man or other person involved shall be liable for criminal action and imposition of penalty as may be fixed by the competent authority.” The definition of “Government” under Clause 12(y) of the Control Order, 2018, reads as under: 7 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 “2(y) “Government” means the Government of Andhra Pradesh” Clause 2(hh) of the Control Order, 2018, which defined “Schedule Commodity” is as under: “(hh) “Schedule Commodity” means any commodity specified in the schedule to this Order, which is intended to supply by the State Government or by an agency appointed by the State Government to any authorised fair price shop for distribution to the cardholders” 8. As per Clause 12(y) and 19(f) of the Control Order ‘Government’ means the “State Government” and the ‘Schedule Commodities’ means the commodities which are specified in the schedule of Control Order, 2018 which is intended to supply by the State Government i.e., the Government of Andhra Pradesh and as such, the clause under 19(f) of the Control Order, 2018 applies to the PDS rice, which is being supplied to the card holders in the State Government of Andhra Pradesh only. 9. However, in the present case, the allegation against the petitioner is that he stored 39 tons of boiled rice at his godown in Tada Town, Nellore District, which, according to the petitioner, was purchased from traders in Tamil Nadu and not from any fair price shop or PDS source within Andhra Pradesh. There is no material or scientific evidence on record to establish that the seized rice is PDS rice supplied under the Andhra Pradesh Public Distribution System. Therefore, invoking the provisions of the Control Order, 2018, and initiating proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, is unsustainable. 8 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 10. It is observed that the stock seized consists of boiled rice stored in the petitioner’s godown and not PDS rice. Boiled rice does not fall within the definition of a “Scheduled Commodity” under Clause 2(hh) of the Control Order, 2018, as it is not supplied by the State Government or any agency authorized agency for distribution through the fair price shop system in Andhra Pradesh. Accordingly, the seizure of the petitioner’s stock and the initiation of 6-A proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act are without jurisdiction. Further, the subsequent auction of the seized rice, without issuing notice to the petitioner and pending proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, is arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. 11. In view of the reasons stated above, this Court feels it appropriate to set aside the action of the respondents in auctioning the seized rice pending 6-A proceedings, as the same is unsustainable in law and contrary to the provisions of the Control Order, 2018. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned auction proceedings conducted by the 3rd respondent with respect to 39 tons of rice seized from the petitioner’s godown at Tada Town, Nellore District, are hereby set aside. The respondents are directed to refund to the petitioner the sale proceeds derived from the auction of the seized rice, or, if the rice is still available, to release the same in favour of the petitioner without imposing any conditions. There shall be no order as to costs. 9 VS,J W.P.No.3297 of 2021 Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 03.11.2025 KGR