V. Pandaiah, Vs The JOint Collector, (Cs) Ii, Ranga Reddy District

Claiming to be the owner of 38.00 qtls., of rice, which was seized along with van bearing No. AP 28 U 1058, the petitioner approached respondent No.1, who initiated proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’), for release of the seized stock.

¶16

The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner with the grievance that so far his application has not been disposed of though nearly two weeks had elapsed.

¶17

Having regard to the facts of the case, I deem it appropriate that the seized stock shall not be sold by the respondents till disposal of the proceedings under Section 6-A.

¶18

Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the main writ petition, W.P.M.P. No.39189 of 2 0 1 0 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous.

¶19

__________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY,J

¶20

DATE: 8^th December, 2010 pnb

V. Pandaiah, v. The JOint Collector, (Cs) Ii, Ranga Reddy District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V. Pandaiah, v. The JOint Collector, (Cs) Ii, Ranga Reddy District

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kondamudi Benerjee Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer and 2 Others

A. Bharath Kumar Vs The District Collector

Hanmanthu Vs TheChief Executive Officer

B.Ramulamma Vs The District Collector

Satti Subba Reddy Vs The Collector, Visakhapatnam District

G.Ramamurthy Vs The Tahsildar