Disposed

K.Prabhakar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Nov 2017WP/35758/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the seizure of stocks by the 3rd respondent. The court declined to quash proceedings under the Essential Commodities Act but directed the 2nd respondent to release the seized vehicle upon furnishing a bank guarantee and to expedite the enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Release of seized vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee; directive to release stocking upon basis of enquiry under Section 6-A.

K.Prabhakar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶2

WP No.35758 of 2017

¶3

ORDER ::

¶4

The case of the petitioners is that stocks belonging to the 1^st petitioner and vehicle belonging to the 2^nd petitioner are seized by the 3^rd respondent on the ground of illegally diverting the stocks (rice) meant for distribution under Public Distribution Scheme.

¶5

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners made representations dated 18-10-2017 and 20-10-2017 to the respondents seeking release of the stocks and the seized vehicle on furnishing bank guarantee, to the value of the stocks and to the value of the seized vehicle, but no orders are passed on the same till date. Hence, this writ petition.

¶6

Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. 4. Since it is stated that the stocks and the offending vehicle are involved in illegal transportation of rice meant for public distribution scheme, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act before the competent authority. However, there shall be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to release the offending vehicle in question on furnishing bank guarantee as security to the satisfaction of 2^nd respondent and also consider the release of seized stocks on furnishing bank guarantee as security to the satisfaction of 2^nd respondent. Before releasing the seized stocks, samples as required be drawn from the stocks for the purpose of enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act. The 2^nd respondent is also directed to conclude the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act as expeditiously as possible. The release of offending vehicle and stocks is subject to the orders that would be passed in the enquiry under Section 6-A of the Act.

¶7

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this case are also disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶8

¶9

A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

¶10

Dated: 07-11-2017 NRG

¶11

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶12

WP No.35758 of 2017 //WEB// Dated: 07-11-2017 NRG

K.Prabhakar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Prabhakar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

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

Kucharlapati Rukmini Devi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Thelgamalla Byagari Anjaiah, Vs The State of Telangana

The Hyderabad District Government Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Kompally Manik Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

S. Prabhakar Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

M/s Oberon Power Corporation Private Limited, Vs The State of Telangana