Allowed

Sri Balaji Trading Company v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC2 Dec 2021WP/28403/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge Writ Court held that a seizure of rice consignment and lorry by a Head Constable was illegal and without jurisdiction. Citing Clause 20(a) of the A.P Control Order and the precedent of Sri Vigneswara Traders, the Court declared the seizure arbitrary and ordered the release of the stock and vehicle within one week.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; stock of rice and lorry to be released to petitioners within one week.

Sri Balaji Trading Company Vs the… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO

¶2

W.P.No.28403 of 2021

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief/s:

¶5

“..to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3^rd respodnentin seizing 587 bags of raw rice weighing 50 Kgs each belong to the 1^st petitioner and the lorry bearing No.AP 27 UB 7089 belong to the 2^nd petitioner under the cover of mediatornama, dt.11.11.2021 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 thereunder including the A.P State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 and contrary to the judgment reported in 2013(4) ALD 241 and set aside the same and direct the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of the illegal seizure and pass such other order or orders..”

¶6

The 1^st petitioner owns a trading company. The 1^st petitioner purchases paddy from the ryoths and mill the same in the rice mill and sell the resultant rice to the different traders and consumers. The 2^nd petitioner claims to be the owner of Lorry bearing No.AP 27 UB 7089 and he is eking out his livelihood by running the same. The 1^st petitioner got an order from Sri Vinayaka Chepala Cheruvu, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District for a consignment of 293.50 quintals of rice. On 10.11.2021 the 1^st petitioner raised invoice vide bill no.25 dated 10.11.2021 for 587 bags of rice which contains broken rice each weighing 50 Kgs and engaged the lorry of the 2^nd petitioner to transport the same to the Fish tank at Nellore. When the lorry was proceeding to Nellore, the 3^rd respondent

¶7

¶8

intercepted the same near Hazapuram cross roads in Hanumanthunipadu Mandal and illegally seized the stock along with lorry under the cover of mediatornama on mere suspicion that the rice in the lorry is PDS rice and registered a case in Crime No.142 of 2021 for the offences under Section 420 IPC and under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 [for short, „the E.C.Act‟].

¶9

Sri V. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently submits that the seizure of the vehicle by the 3^rd respondent – Head Constable, Hanumanthunipadu Police Station is not authorized and not competent to seize the stock and vehicle for the alleged offence. Even if the alleged offence is true, the police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police is competent to seize and register the case for the alleged offence. The 3^rd respondent is not competent to seize the rice and/or vehicle under Clause 20 of the A.P State Targeted Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2018 [for short, „Control Order‟]. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on Clause 20(a) of the Control Order, 2018, which reads as under:

¶10

“Any officer or person authorized by the State Government or by the District Collector or by Collector (Civil Supplies) the appointing authority or any officer of the Civil Supplies/other State Government departments not below the rank of Revenue Inspector/Checking Inspector/Enquiry Inspector (Civil Supplies), or any Gazetted Officer of Vigilance and Enforcement Department of the State or any officer authorized in this behalf by the State Government not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector of Police, may enter the premises of the fair price

¶11

¶12

shop or any private premises where the scheduled commodities pertaining to Targeted Public Distribution system or other Government schemes are kept/positioned or found in transit and conduct inspection and seize any stocks of scheduled commodities, supply documents or books, accounts or other related document for the purpose of such inspection/seizure for contravention of the provisions of this Order, Officers of Legal Metrology Department, Team of Social Audit appointed by Commissioner of Civil Supplies are also empowered to inspect the fair price shop premises, in regard to weights and measures.”

¶13

He also placed reliance on the reported decision in Sri

¶14

Vigneswara Traders, Komerapudi Village, Sattenapalli Mandal, Guntur District, Rep. by its ProprietorK.gangadhara Reddy and another Vs. Circle Inspector of Police, Porumamilla Police Station, Kadapa District and two others¹ . He further submits that following the above decision, this Court in W.P.No.9969 of 2021 by orders dated 18.11.2021 had set aside the police proceedings therein by declaring the seizure of stock and vehicle as illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law.

¶15

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the learned counsel and on perusal of the record, this Court found that a reading of the provisions of Clause 20(a) of the Control Order, 2018 shows that it empowers only the police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of the jurisdictional police station to search and seize the stock/vehicle on a reasonable suspicion that

¶16

1 (2013) 4 ALD 241

¶17

¶18

the stock being stored or transported is PDS rice. On such seizure, immediately he has to inform to the concerned officers to take appropriate action as per the provisions of the Control Order and under the provisions of the E.C Act. In the case of Sri Vigneswara Traders (supra), this Court held that the seizure of rice and vehicle on the suspicion that the rice being transported in the vehicle was PDS rice by the Head Constable is illegal and without jurisdiction. In view of the decision in the case of Sri Vigneswara Traders (supra) and the order passed in W.P.No.9969 of 2021 dated 18.11.2021, this Court is not persuaded to take any different view to that of the above decisions. Hence, the seizure of stocks and vehicle by the 3^rd respondent under mediatornama dated 11.11.2021 is declared as illegal, arbitrary and without authority of law and consequently the same is liable to be set aside.

¶19

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to release the stocks of rice and lorry to the petitioners within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No order as to costs.

¶20

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶21

___________________________ JUSTICE M.GANGA RAO

¶22

02.12.2021 Note: Issue CC in two days. B/o Vjl

¶23

¶24

THE HON’BLE SRI JUST ICE M.GANGA RAO

¶25

Writ Petition No. 28403 of 2021

¶26