Kandula Jaya Babu Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

¶1

APHC010404582025

¶2

o lU IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADE Vi AT AMARAVATI / (Special Original Jurisdiction) I :3ovv

¶3

THURSDAY,THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 20893 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Kandula Jaya Babu, S/o Uma Maheswara Rao, Aged about 55 years, Hindu, Occ : Business, R/O D.No.3/365- A Nooruddinpeta, Javvarpeta, Machilipatnam, Petitioner Krishna District, AP.

¶9

AND

¶10

1, The State- of Andhra Pradesh Reo bv Its Principal Secretary consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies A.P.Secretariat

¶11

CSl Department Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh

¶12

The Joint Collector (CS), Machilipatnam, Krishna District, A .

¶13

3.The Special Deputy Tahsildar, (CS),

¶14

Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, AP.

¶15

The Tahsildar, Gudur, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, AP

¶16

The village Revenue officer, Gudur, Machilipatnam, Krishna District,AP

¶17

The Inspector.of Police, and Enforcement (Cbj,

¶18

Vigilance Krishna District, A.P

¶19

Vijayawada

¶20

‘iw

¶21

4
:
7. The Station House Officer,
Gudur Station,
Machilipatnam,
Krishna District, A.P
S.Garlapati Jagan Mohan Rao
S/O.Radha Krishna Murthy
Owner of M/s.Gomati Rice Mill
Tarakaturupalem Village,
Guduru Mandal, Krishna District, AP
9 Puppala Suri Babu S/o.Brahmam
Owner-cum-Driver ofAshok Leyland Dost
Vehicle bearing No.AP 16TA 7249
R/o.Chilakalapudi, Machilipatnam
Krishna District, AP
10 Siramsetti Srinivasa Rao
S/o.Dharma Rao, owner-cum-driver
Vehicle bearing no.AP 39 TL 6555
R/o.Sukarlabad, Machilipatnam
Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh
I
t
1
11 Chitrada Aravind S/o.Pandu Ranga Rao
Driver ofTATA Intra Vehicle bearing No.
AP 39VB 0766, R/o.Naidu Baddi Centre
Hindu College Backside, Machilipatnam
Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh.
12.MahepaHi Chandra Mohan Kumar@ Chinna
S/o.Ranga Rao, R/o.Nijampeta,
Machilipatnam (V) & (M) Krishna Distric
Andhra Pradesh
not necessary parties
( Petitioners No.8 to 12 are
tothepresentwritpetition)

Respondents

¶22

r

¶23

/

¶24

Constitution of India praying that in the Petition under Article 226 of the circumstances stated in the affidavit fiied therewith,^{theHighCourtmaybe} particularly one in the nature pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more nd respondent in passing of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2 confiscation proceedings under Section 6-A of EC Act in ECP No.59 of 2025 respondent herein to take delivery of the Dated 08.07.2025 directing the 4 respondent and to dispose of the seized seized stock from the custody of 5 stock by conducting open auction as being highly illegal.^{arbitrary,contraryto} contemplated under Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and the procedure as of natural justice and consequently to direct the also violative of Principles release the seized stock i.e. 137.50 qtls of rice in respondents no. 2 to 6 to 276 bags belonging to the petitioner herein. lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned proceedings in ECP No.59 of 2025 Dated 08.07.2025 nd issued by the 2 respondent and direct the respondent No.2 to 6 to release the seized stock i.e., 137.50 qtls of rice in 276 bags belonging to the petitioner pending disposal of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner; M/s.THOTA SUNEETHA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondents No.2 to 5: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondents No.6 & 7: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.8 to 12; None appeared The Court made the following Order;

¶26

APHC010404582025

¶27

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3458] ATAMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 20893 OF 2025

¶32

Between:

¶33

KANDULA JAVA BABU, S/0 UMA MAHESWARA RAO, AGED ABOUT R/0 D.N0.3/365-A

¶34

55 YEARS HINDU, OCC. BUSINESS MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA

¶35

NOORUDDINPETA, JAWARPETA, DISTRICT, AP.

¶36

...PETITIONER

¶37

AND

¶38

PRADESH, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL

¶39

1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA AFFAIRS, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶40

SECRETARY CONSUMER VELAGAPUDI

¶41

A.P.SECRETARIAT

¶42

CSI DEPARTMENT AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH

¶43

THE JOINT COLLECTOR CS, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP.

¶44

TAHSILDAR CS, MACHILIPATNAM

¶45

1. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP.

¶46

THE TAHSILDAR, GUDUR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP

¶47

THE VILLAGE REVENUE OFFICER, GUDUR, MACHILIPATNAM, KRISHNA DISTRICT,AP

¶48

THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ENFORCEMENT (CS), VIJAYAWADA, KRISHNA DISTRICT, A.P

¶49

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, GUDUR STATION,

¶50

2

¶51

'4

¶52

MACHILIPATNAM, KRrSHNA DISTRICT, A.P

¶53

GARLAPATI JAGAN MOHAN RAO, S/O.RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY OWNER OF M/S.GOMATI RICE MILL TARAKATURUPALEM VILLAGE, GUDURU MANDAL, KRISHNA DISTRICT, AP

¶54

PUPPALA SURI BABU, S/O.BRAHMAM OWNER-CUM-DRIVER OF ASHOK LEYLAND DOST VEHICLE BEARING NO.AP 16TA 7249 R/O.CHILAKALAPUDI, MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT,^AP

¶55

10.SIRAMSETTI SRINIVASA RAO, S/O.DHARMA RAO, OWNER-CUMDRIVER VEHICLE BEARING NO.AP 39 TL 6555 R/O.SUKARLABAD, MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT,

¶56

ANDHRA PRADESH

¶57

11.CHITRADA ARAVIND, S/O.PANDU RANGA RAO DRIVER OF TATA INTRA VEHICLE BEARING NO. AP 39VB 0766, R/O.NAIDU BADDI CENTRE HINDU COLLEGE BACKSIDE, MACHILIPATNAM KRISHNA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH.

¶58

12.MAHEPALLI CHANDRA MOHAN KUMAR CHINNA, S/O.RANGA RAO, R/O.NIJAMPETA, MACHILIPATNAM (V) AND (M) KRISHNA DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH RESPONDENTS ( PETITIONERS N0.8 TO 12 ARE NOT NECESSARY PARTIES TO THE PRESENT WRIT PETITION)

¶59

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶60

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶61

1.THOTASUNEETHA

¶62

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶63

1.GP FOR HOME

¶64

2.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶65

3

¶66

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA

¶67

WRIT PETITION NO: 20893 OF 2025

¶68

The Court made the following order;

¶69

The writ petition is filed seeking direction to the^{respondentstorelease} the seized stock i.e. 137.50 qtls of rice in 276 bags^{belongingtothepetitioner.}

¶70

Heard Ms. T.Suneetha, learned counsel for the petitioner^andlearned Assistant Government pleader for Civil Supplies appearing for the respondents. in rice. On 3. It is contended that the petitioner is a small trader 02.07.2025, when the vehicles carrying the rice bags^were stopped at Gomathi Rice Mill for weighing, the respondent seized^{thestockbelonging} to the petitioner, suspecting it to be intended for^{thepublicdistributionsystem,} alleging that the petitioner attempted to divert it to the black market in contravention of the APSTPDS (Control) Order, 2018. It is further argued that the respondents have also seized the rice mill, without^{consideringthevalid} invoices and bills sought to be produced by the petitioner.^{Whenthepetitioner} has sought for release of the stock stating that the^{seizedriceisnotPDSrice,} filed an application before the 2"'^ respondent, the^{samewasrejectedandthe} 4*'^ respondent was directed to take the delivery of^{theseizedstockfromthe} custody of the 5'^ respondent and conduct public auction. Hence, the instant writ petition.

¶71

The learned counsels would submit that similar matter^{inW.P.No.7713} of 2024 was disposed of by this Court, directing the^{respondentsthereinto}

¶72

4

¶73

tl release the stock in favour of the petitioner therein on furnishing security and requests that the same order may be passed in the present case also.

¶74

Perused the record, having regard to the contentions advanced, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P.No.7713 of 2024 dated 28.03.2024.

¶75

In terms of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs. 7. The Registry is directed to append a copy of the order passed i n W.P.No.7713 of 2024, dated 01.04.2024 to this order.

¶76

As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

¶77

//TRUE COPY//

¶78

SRIWIVAS

¶79

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶80

To,

¶81

SEC TOfCOmCER

¶82

The Principal Secretary Consumer Affairs, Food and Civil Supplies CSI Department, A.P.Secretariat Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh

¶83

The Joint Collector CS, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, AP. 3. The Special Deputy Tahsildar CS, Machilipatnam Mandal, Krishna District, AP.

¶84

The Tahsildar, Gudur, Machilipatnam, Krishna District, AP

¶85

The village Revenue officer, Gudur, Machilipatnam, Krishna District,AP 6. The Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Enforcement (CS), Vijayawada,

¶86

Krishna District, A.P.

¶87

The Station House Officer, Gudur Station Machilipatnam, Krishna

District, A.P.

\

t

f*'

One CC to M/s. Thota Suneetha, Advocate [OPUC]

¶93

Two CCs to GP for HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 10. Two CCs to GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]

¶94

Two CCs to GP for REVENUE, High Court of Andhra Pradesh.[OUT]

¶95

Two CD Copies

¶96

Vna

¶97

*Along with the copy of the Order passed in W.P.No.7713 of 2024, dated 01.04.2024.

HIGH COURT

DATED:07/08/2025

ORDER

WP NO. 20893 OF 2025

m
= 31) AUG 2025 „
^ Current Section ^

¶103

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶104

1^-

¶105

APHCO10148712024

¶106

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶107

[3329]

¶108

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶109

THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶110

PRESENT

¶111

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶112

WRIT PETITION NO: 7713/2024

¶113

Between:

¶114

Mohansai Manikanta Rice And Generals

¶115

...PETITIONER

¶116

AND

¶117

The State Of Ap and Others

¶118

...RESPONDENT(S)

¶119

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶120

l.V SUDHAKAR REDDY

¶121

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶122

l.GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES (AP)

¶123

The Court made the following:

¶124

ORDER:

¶125

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned^Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and perused the material^{availableonrecord.}

¶126

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is^{theownerofthe} seized stock and vehicle. The petitioner is doing Riee business. The Respondent Nos.3 and 4 intercepted the petitioner’s vehicle at the underpass of Duggirala Village on NH-16 and highhandedly^{seizedthesame} under the cover of mediators Report dated 02.03.2024 and they also collected the samples to send for analysis.

¶127

r

¶128

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner filed a petition dated 11.03.2024 before the Respondent No.2,^{statingallthefacts} and requesting him to release the stock as well as^theVehicle. He further submits that the Assistant Manager (Tech), APSCSCL,^{Eluruhasfurnished} the technical analysis Report dated 11.03.2024, wherein it is clearly reported that the refractions are no way tallied the^{specifiedrefractionsfixed} for PDS rice. Therefore, the rice seized cannot be^{saidthatitisPDSriceand} the Respondent No.2 ought to have released both vehicle^{aswellastherice} unconditionally. But, the Respondent No.2 did not pass^{anyorderstilldate.} 4) Learned counsel further submits that in view of the GOl S.O.No.354(E), dated 29.11.2013, the APSCD(LS86R) Order, 2008 is not applicable in respect of “Paddy” and “Rice” from 01.12.2014. He further submits that the rice was taken out of the Essential Commodities Act by way of an order passed by the Ministry of consumer^{Affairs,FoodandPublic} Distribution, Government of India, New Delhi in G.S.R.104 (E), dated 15.02.2002 issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3 of the Act. Therefore, the rice is not an essential commodity, hence no action under Sec.6-A of the E.C Act can be initiated. Hence,^{theWritPetition.} 5) Having heard the respective counsel and upon perusal^{ofthematerial} available on record, it is an admitted fact that subsequent^{totheseizureof} the rice and vehicle, proceedings under Section 6-A^{areinitiatedbeforethe} 2"'^ Respondent, who is the competent authority. The^{illegalityandvalidity} of the seizure has to be decided by the 2'^'^ Respondent^{in6-Aproceedings.} This Court is not inclined to interfere into the 6-A proceedings.

¶129

/ . 6) However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case^andin the light of the latest order passed by a Division^{BenchofthisCourtin} Onteru Bhaskar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, represented^by its Principal Secretary, Civil Supplies Department and others ^ in our considered opinion, it is appropriate and reasonable to direct the Respondents to release the seized stock in favour of the petitioner respectively on imposing eertain conditions, to protect^the interest of the Respondents, pending disposal of the 6-A proceedings. 7) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The Respondents shall release the seized stock pursuant^tothe Mediators Report, dated 02.03.2024, in favour of the^{petitioneroncondition} of furnishing personal or third party immovable security^{propertyequivalent} to the value of the seized stock, within a period of^{two(02)weeksfromthe} date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶130

(ii) Further, directing the petitioner not to alienate the^property offered as security in favour of the Respondents, for^aperiod of three months.

¶131

(iii) There shall be no order as to costs. 8) As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶132

JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶133

28* March, 2024. Note; Issue CC by 01.04.2024 B/o. Knr

¶134

^ 2022 see Online AP 348

Kandula Jaya Babu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kandula Jaya Babu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Onteru Eswaramma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Onteru Eswaramma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Boggula Abdul Gafhar Vs the State of Ap

Smt.N. Maruthi Mahalakshmi Vs the State of Ap

C H Jhansi Achary Vs the State of Ap

Smt P Subhashini Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh