Disposed

Srirama Traders v. Govt. of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC4 Jul 2014WP/18481/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order in Writ Petition No.18481 of 2014 concerns redirected consideration for seized seed stocks. The Court, noting the agricultural season and risk of stock becoming worthless, directed the respondent to consider releasing the stock subject to the petitioner furnishing an enforceable bank guarantee.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.2 to consider release of seized stocks subject to petitioner furnishing enforceable bank guarantee within one week.

Srirama Traders Vs Govt. of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.18481 OF 2014

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies.

¶5

Petitioner is a trader in seeds. A check was conducted on petitioner’s premises and on finding variation in various seed stocks, and on, prima facie, violation of the provisions of Essential Commodities Act, 1955, (for short, ”the Act”) a report was made to respondent No.2 under Section 6A(I) of the Act. As per the said report, the petitioner’s stock, which is seized under various categories of fertilizers, is approximately valued at Rs.6,73,825/- and is stated to be in the custody of Assistant Director of Agriculture, Chevella. Petitioner was given a notice and thereby he made an application dated 23.06.2014 before respondent No.2 requesting for release of the stock and he has also submitted his explanation explaining the variations found in the said report. Petitioner has offered to furnish bank guarantee for the full estimated value of the stock to the satisfaction of respondent No.2. However, since no orders are passed, the present writ petition is filed.

¶6

In the facts and circumstances of the case, evidently, the seized stock of seeds is required to be utilized as the agricultural season commences now and if the said stock is not disposed of, it would be rendered worthless. Keeping in view the balance of convenience and to safeguard the interest of the revenue, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent No.2 to consider the release of stocks subject to recovery of enforceable bank guarantee from the petitioner for the value of the stock, within a week from today. Respondent No.2 shall be free to fix the value of the stocks for the purpose of fixing the bank guarantee amount.

¶7

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶8

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be

¶9

no order as to costs.

¶10

______________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J

¶11

July 4, 2014 Note: - Furnish copy by 07.07.2014. {B/o}LMV

Srirama Traders v. Govt. of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srirama Traders v. Govt. of Telangana rep. by its Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Md. Yakub, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. M. Anjana Devi, Vs The District Collector

Yelampally Padma Vs The District Revenue Officer

Tupakula Aravala Raju, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh,Rep by its Principal

Jai Kisan Seeds and Seed Processors, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Principal

T.Sanjeevu Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh