Disposed

Y. Kishore Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC27 Sept 2022WP/26113/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for illegal seizure of rice and lorry under Essential Commodities Act. Court directed third respondent to permit petitioner to submit explanation under Section 6-B and conclude Section 6-A enquiry within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to submit explanation within one week; authorities to conclude enquiry under Section 6-A within four weeks of receipt of explanation.

Y. Kishore Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.26113 OF 2022

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

(1) This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following relief:

¶5

“To issue Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4^th respondent herein in seizing the stocks i.e 17,290 Kgs of rice belonging to the petitioner and the Lorry bearing Reg No.AP7Y4478 belonging to the petitioner‟s father under Mediatornama dated 16.10.2017 as being illegal arbitrary and unjust and consequently set aside the same and further direct the respondents to release the seized stocks along with lorry pursuant to Mediatornama dated 16.10.2017.”

¶6

(2) On 13.09.2022 this Court ordered for appearance of the third respondent – Joint Collector, Dr. Ambedkar Konaseema District, Amalapuram with regard to the status of 17,290 Kgs of

¶7

rice and the lorry bearing Registration No.AP 7Y 4478 seized, pursuant to Mediator‟s Report dated 16.10.2017.

¶8

(3) Pursuant to the order dated 13.09.2022, Sri H.M. Dhyanachandra, I.A.S, Joint Collector, who is the third respondent herein is present before this Court. The third respondent submits that, till now, proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short

¶9

„the Act‟) are not concluded and no orders are issued for interim

¶10

¶11

disposal of the seized stock and seized vehicle by the then 6-A authorities. He came to know about this case recently and immediately he issued notice under Section 6-B of the Act, calling for explanation of the petitioner and he did not receive the explanation so far to proceed further.

¶12

(4) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the pendency of this writ petition, explanation is not submitted to the notice issued under Section 6-B of the Act.

¶13

(5) In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances prevailing in this case, though this Court is not satisfied with the action of the respondents in dealing with the case under Section 6-A of the Act, wherein, 17,290 Kgs of rice and lorry bearing Registration No.AP 7Y 4478 are seized on 16.10.2017, without going into the merits of the case, at this stage, in our considered opinion, it is appropriate to direct the third respondent to permit the petitioner to submit explanation to the notice issued under Section 6-B of the Act by the third respondent, within a period of one week from today and to direct the third respondent to conclude the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act, within a

¶14

¶15

period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of the explanation, to meet the interest of justice.

¶16

(6) Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, with the following directions:

¶17

(1) The petitioner is permitted to submit explanation to the notice issued under Section 6-B of the Act, to the third respondent within one (01) week from today.

¶18

(2) On receipt of the explanation, the third respondent shall conclude the proceedings under Section 6-A of the Act, in accordance with law and communicate the order to the petitioner within four (04) weeks thereafter.

¶19

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶20

Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending if any,

¶21

shall stand closed.

¶22

JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

Dated: 27.09.2022

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶27

WRIT PETITION No. 26113 OF 2022

¶28

Dated: 27.09.2020

¶29

Y. Kishore Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Y. Kishore Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sankuri Venkata Priyanka Vs Mahadasu Sai Sridhar

Maddimsetti Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Murthy Vs Dasari Narasimha Swamy

Smt. Medishetti Sandhya Rani Vs Medishetti Veera Venkata Satyanadam

Shaik Karimoon Begum Vs Jonnalagadda Venkateswarlu

Tegala (Keta) Hymavathi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Pathipati Guravaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh