1 APHC010084772019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3333] WEDNESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA WRIT PETITION NO: 3745/2019 Between: 1. KOPPARAPU RAMA KRISHNA, S/O. K. GURAVAIAH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, MYDUKUR TOWN, BADVEL ROAD, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE JOINT COLLECTOR, KADAPA, Y.S.R. KADAPA DISTRICT. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, MYDUKUR MANDAL, MYDUKUR, Y.S.R. KADAPA 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 to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents the seized rice in the House No. 6/194-1 Premises at Mydukuru Village Seized Stock 104.16 quintals of rice and conducting the Panchanama dated 31.08.2017 is illegal, improper and without any power or authority under law 2 and direct to the respondents released the stock belongs the petitioner seized stock and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2019 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 Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to release the Seized Stock by furnishing 3rd party security of 104.16 Quintals Rice 56 Plastic Bags containing 26.88 quintals 161 Gunny Bags 77.28 Quintals Rice, Respondents conducting Pa.nchanama Mydukur Village, Kadapa District dated 31.08.2017 to the Petitioner pending disposal of the above Writ Petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. LAKSHMI D S Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP) The Court made the following: 3 ORDER: The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:- “….to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents the seized rice in the House No. 6/194-1 Premises at Mydukuru Village Seized Stock 104.16 quintals of rice and conducting the Panchanama dated 31.08.2017 is illegal, improper and without any power or authority under law and direct to the respondents released the stock belongs the petitioner seized stock and to pass….” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the on 31.08.2018, on credible information, the Tahsildar, Mydukur along with his staff have inspected the premises in D.No.6/194-1, Badvel road, Mydukur mandal and found huge quantity of PDS rice being loaded in an auto for transportation. On enquiry, they came to know that the petitioner herein has unloaded a lorry load of PDS rice in the said house for transferring the same to plastic bags in order to diver the PDS rice into black market. As such, the inspecting officials seized the entire stock of 104.16 quintals of PDS rice along with the auto under a cover of panchanama. Challenging the said seizure, the petitioner filed W.P.No.38444 of 2017 wherein, this Court vide order dated 29.11.2017 has directed the 2nd respondent to conclude the enquiry after issuing a show cause notice under Section 6A of the Act and after considering the 4 explanation of the petitioner, within a period of six weeks. It was further observed that the seized stock shall not be sold or disposed and that if the 2nd respondent failed to conclude the enquiry within the stipulated time, the seized stock shall be released to the petitioner on obtaining security. 3. Pursuant to the said order, the 2nd respondent has passed the impugned endorsement dated 21.02.2018 directing the release of the seized stock of 104.16 quintals of rice on production of bank guarantee to a tune of Rs.3,47,222/-. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the present writ petition is filed. 4. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 22.03.2019, this Court has passed the following interim order: “…there shall be an interim direction to respondents to release seized stock on deposit of 50% of the value of stock, and bank guarantee for the remaining 50%.” 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 6. Today when the writ petition came up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader has produced a copy of proceedings of the Joint Collector, YSR Kadapa district dated 09.09.2025 wherein it is stated that pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court on 22.03.2019, the petitioner has neither produced a bank guarantee nor has attended before the Joint Collector for finalization of the case pending under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act. It is further stated that the petitioner has failed to 5 comply with the interim orders granted by this Court. It is further stated that till date, the case under Section 6A of the Essential Commodities Act is pending. As such, requested to dismiss the present petition. 7. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that as the petitioner was not in a position to furnish bank guarantee, he could not comply with the directions passed by this Court. As such, requested this Court to permit the petitioner to furnish personal bonds instead of furnishing a bank guarantee for release of the seized stocks. 8. It can be seen that though this Court has directed the respondents to release seized stock on deposit of 50% of the value of stock by the petitioner, and bank guarantee for the remaining 50%, the petitioner has not taken any steps to comply with the said order. As such, instead of keeping the writ petition pending, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to approach the 2nd respondent and make a request for release of stock on furnishing his personal bonds as he is not in a position to furnish bank guarantee as directed by this Court on 22.03.2019 and the same may be considered in accordance with law. However, as the case against the petitioner under Section 6A of Essential Commodities Act is still pending for enquiry, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to complete the enquiry, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6 9. Accordingly, with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ____________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date :24.09.2025. Gss