APHC010470182025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] TUESDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 24227/2025 Between: 1. M/S. ARUN TRADERS,, 4-4-I59/1A UPPER, TIRUPATI TO CHENNAI BYPASS, KEELAPATTU, NAGIRI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR, T. AMIRITHA RAJ 2. . N.SREENIVASULU, S/O. RAMANAIAH, S/O. RAMAIAH, AGE 46 YEARS, OWNER OF LORRY BEARING NO.AP02 X0166, R/O. BIIGGA AGRAHARAM, NAGIRI, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER(S) 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, CHITTOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, GANGAVARAM, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, GANGAVARAM URBAN PS, 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 topleased to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in seizing 400 bags of boiled rice weighing 50 kgs each along with lorry bearing No.AP 02X 0166 belong to the petitioners 1 and 2 respectively, under cover of Confession, Arrest and Seizure Mahazarnama, dt.24.06.2025 and the order passed by the 2nd respondent while Endorsement Rc.No.E2/83/2025 dt.24.07.2025 directing the 1st petitioner to produce Deposit Receipts for an amount of Rs.5,20,000/- and for an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- respectively as illegal, arbitrary, without any authority of law or jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Control Orders made there under and set aside the same and direct the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of illegal seizure and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to release 400 bags of boiled rice weighing 50 kgs each to the 1st Petitioner and the lorry bearing No.AP 02X 0166 to the 2nd petitioner forthwith by suspending the Endorsement Rc.No.E2/83/2025 dt.24.07.2025 of the 2nd respondent pending disposal of writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. V SUDHAKAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following: ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “…to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in seizing 400 bags of boiled rice weighing 50 kgs each along with lorry bearing No.AP 02X 0166 belong to the petitioners 1 and 2 respectively, under cover of Confession Arrest and Seizure Mahazarnama, dated 24.06.2025 and the order passed by the 2nd respondent while Endorsement Rc.No.E2/83/2025, dated 24.07.2025, directing the 1st petitioner to produce Deposit Receipts for an amount of Rs.5,20,000/- and for an amount of Rs.1,20,000/- respectively as illegal, arbitrary, without any authority of law or jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Control Orders made there under and set aside the same and direct the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of illegal seizure and pass…” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is carrying on business under the name and style of M/s. Arun Trades with a valid GSTIN No.37AHDPT3283G2Z2 and the petitioner is doing business in food grains such as raw rice and boiled rice. In the said process, the petitioner has received an order from a dealer namely M/s.Nagesh Enterprises, Tykal Road, Bangarapet, Karnataka State for supplying 400 bags of boiled rice. Therefore, the petitioner purchased 400 bags of boiled rice from Swathi Traders, Devispet Village, Indukurpet Mandal, SPSR Nellore District vide Invoice No.55, dated 23.06.2025 and got transported the same into the petitioner‟s business premises in Keelpattu, Nagari in a lorry bearing No.AP 21 TZ 7848. On the next day, the petitioner raised a bill Invoice No.62 dated 24.06.2025 in the name of M/s. Nagesh Enterprises and generated e-way bill at 07:34 a.m., and loaded the stock into a lorry bearing No.AP 02 X 0166, which belongs to the petitioner No.2 and handed over the Invoice bill and e-way bill to the driver of the lorry with instructions to deliver the boiled rice at the address shown in the bill. The said e-way bill was generated on 24.06.2025 and the same is valid up to 26.06.2025. 3. While the aforesaid lorry is proceeding from Bangarupeta, the Inspector of Police, Gangavaram Urban Police Station along with his staff had intercepted the lorry at Dandapalle Road Junction on Bangalore-Chennai National Highway (NH-69) at about 04.00 p.m. on 24.06.2025 and seized the same highhandedly alleging that the rice available in the lorry is a PDS rice. Though the petitioner has produced the copies of the purchase invoice, sale invoice and e-way bill accompanied with the load, the respondent No.4 without considering the same had seized the lorry along with the stock of 400 bags of boiled rice alleging that the said rice is purchased from the beneficiaries of the surrounding villages of Tamil Nadu State. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said confession, arrest and seizure Mahazarnama prepared by the respondent No.4 are illegal and not sustainable as he did not follow the procedure contemplated under Section 103 (4) of BNSS, 2023 and the panchyatdars shown in the Mahazarnama are none other than the Government employees and no independent and respectable inhabitants of the locality witnessed the search and seizure. Thereafter, the respondent No.4 registered the case in Cr.No.102 of 2025, under Section 6A, 7(1) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and informed the respondent No.3 regarding the seizure of stock, who in turn handedover the seized stock to the In charge, MLS Point, Chittoor and filed a report under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, before the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2, without properly considering the petition filed by the petitioner, wherein it is specifically stated that the petitioner was transporting the boiled rice having purchased through proper sale invoice and e-way bill had issued an endorsement vide Roc.No.E2/83/2025, dated 24.07.2025, directed the petitioner to produce the Deposit Receipt for an amount of Rs.5,20,000/- and another Deposit Receipt for an amount of Rs.1,20,000/-, in favour of the Collector (CS), Chittoor, for release of the seized stock and lorry. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed on the ground that there are no transport restrictions for rice and paddy within the country w.e.f., 01.12.2014 and the Government also rescinded the licensing system and also that the respondent No.4 has no authority of law to seize the boiled rice. 5. The respondent No.2 has filed a counter affidavit duly admitting the facts as stated by the petitioner, however, it is stated that as per the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the Control Orders, selling and purchase of any PDS rice is liable for penal action. As per Clause 19(f) of the Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System Control Orders, 2018, the 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, or 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 i.e., the Collector (CS) of Andhra Pradesh State Targeted Public Distribution System Control Orders, 2018 and the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 6. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that an order passed by the Ministry of Consumer‟s Affairs Food and Public Distribution, Government of India, New Delhi in G.S.R.10(E), dated 15.02.2002, is not applicable to the present case because the petitioner No.2 has stated in the panchanama that he was transporting the rice pertaining to Tamil Nadu PDS boiled rice, as such the said illegal transportation of PDS rice from Bangarupeta to Karnataka is for the pecuniary benefits of the petitioners. It is also stated that the enquiry before the Collector (CS), Chittoor is still pending and as such requested this Court to dismiss the writ petition as devoid of merits. 7. 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. 8. For better appreciation of the case, Clause 19(f) of the 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: “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” 9. On a perusal of the said definitions, it can be understood that „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 also applies to the PDS rice, which is being supplied to the card holders in the State Government of Andhra Pradesh only. But, however, the case of the petitioner is that he has purchased the boiled rice from M/s. Swathi Traders, Devispet Village, Indukurpet Mandal, SPSR Nellore District vide Invoice No.55, dated 23.06.2025 and thereafter transported it to his business premises and also raised a bill vide Invoice No.62 dated 24.06.2025 in the name of M/s. Nagesh Enterprises and generated e-way bill at 07:34 a.m., and loaded the stock into a lorry bearing No.AP 02 X 0166, which belongs to the petitioner No.2 and handed over the Invoice bill and e- way bill to the driver of the lorry. 10. As per the panchanama also it can be observed that the petitioner No.2 was carrying 400 bags boiled rice in his lorry but not PDS rice. Admittedly, boiled rice does not fall under the definition of “Schedule Commodity” as per Clause 2(hh) of the Control Order, 2018 as it is not supplied by the State Government or by an agency appointed by the State Government to any authorized fair price shop for distribution to the cardholders. In such a case, the act of petitioner transporting boiled rice does not attract the clauses stipulated in Control Order. As such, submitting a report by the 3rd respondent under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act and thereafter issuance of the impugned endorsement, dated 24.07.2025, is unsustainable under the Control Order. 11. In view of the reasons explained as above, this Court feels it appropriate to set aside impugned endorsement vide Roc.No.E2/83/2025, dated 24.07.2025 and as well as the 6A proceedings that are pending before the respondent No.2. 12. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned endorsement vide Roc.No.E2/83/2025, dated 24.07.2025 as well as the proceedings under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act, that are pending before the respondent No.2, are hereby set aside. In view of the same, the respondent No.2 is directed to release the seized stock i.e., 400 bags of boiled rice and as well as the vehicle bearing No. AP 02 X 0166 in favour of the petitioner without imposing any conditions. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 14.10.2025 SRT 300 THE HONOURABLE SMT.JUSTICE V.SUJATHA W.P.No.24227 of 2025 Date: 14.10.2025 SRT