Disposed

Vydyanath Jamedar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Jul 2025WP/12891/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging seizure of a lorry carrying 285 quintals of rice under BNS and Essential Commodities Act provisions. During pendency, respondents produced a confiscation order; the court directed its communication to the petitioner so he could appeal, and disposed of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to communicate the confiscation order dated 08.05.2025; petitioner at liberty to apply to the appellate authority.

Vydyanath Jamedar Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

I^r2rel

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY,THE THIRD^{DAY OF JULY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{T.MADHAVIDEVI}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 12891 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Vydyanath Jamedar, S/o Dudappa, age.40^{years, Occu.Business Prop. Balaji} Tiaders, whole saleand Retail Grain Merchant,^{Sy.no.319,Natrajnagar,} Rajendra nagar,Telangana -500 030

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Rep.by Principal Secretary,^{ConsumerAffairs Food} and Civil Supplies, T.S. Secretariat Buildings,^Hyderabad

¶12

2 The District Collector, (Civil Supplies) Sangareddy^district.

¶13

J The Additional Collector ( Civil Supplies), Sangareddy^district

¶14

4 The Deputy Tahasildar, (Civil Supplies)^{Pulkal, Sangareddy district.}

¶15

5 The Station House Officer, Pulkal, Sangareddy^district.

¶16

6 The District Collector, Ivledchal^Malkajgiri

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Anicle 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court may be pleased} to issue an order, direction or Writ^{moreparticularlyone in the nature of Writ of} Mandamus declaring the action of respondent^{no.S,in registering the case against} the petitioner vide Crime no. 52 of^{2025 Uls 318(4) BNS and section7 of Essential} commodities Act under a cover of^{panchanama and seizureof 285 quintalsof rice} along with lorry bearing no. KA 3844584^{and there cannot be applicable to the} above penal^provisions of law as^{illegal,arbitrary, withoutthe sanction of law and} consequently release the seized rice of 285^{quintals along with Lorry bearing no.KA} 38A 4584 to the^petitioneras the said^{rice is not PDS rice.}

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

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 direct} the respondents No's 2 to 4 to release the^{Rice quantityof 285. quintals along with}

¶21

Lorry bearing no KA38A 4584 to the petitioner which was seized under a cover of panchanama dated.5-04-2c25 in connection with crime no. 52 of 2o2i, uts 318(4) BNS and section 7 of Essential commodities Act on the file of the responaent, pending disposal of Writ petition

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt. DASI RAMESH

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: Gp FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: cp FOR HOME

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent NO.6: Gp FOR REVENUE

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

¶28

¶29

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI^DEVI

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.12891of 2025

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This Writ Petition is hled challenging the action of the respondents in seizure of lorry bearing No.KA 38 A 4584^{along with} 285 quintals of rice.

¶33

Leamed Govemment Pleader for Civil Supplies, appearing for respondents No.l to 4, has produced a copy of the order^dated 08.05.2025 passed under Section 6-.4 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, confiscating both rice as well as vehicle and imposing penalty of Rs.3,99,999l- as penalty in lieu of confiscation of vehicle.

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said order has not been communicated to the petitioner.

¶35

In view thereot the respondents are directed to communicate the order dated 08.05.2025 passed under Section 6-,4. ofthe Act, to the petitioner and on receipt of the same, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application before the appellate authority.

¶36

TMDJ wp_72897-2025

¶37

¶38

5 With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of.

¶39

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶40

6 Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in this Writ

¶41

Petition, shall stand closed.

¶42

SD/. S. MALLIKARJUNA RAO ISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

To,

SECTION OFFICER

1 . The Principal Secreta ry, Consumer Affairs Food and Civil Suppties, T,S Secretaria t Buildings, H yderabad

¶47

The District Collector, (Civil Supplies) Sangareddy district.

¶48

The Additional Collector ( Civil Supplies), Sangareddy district.

¶49

The Deputy Tahasildar, (Civil Supplies) pulkal, Sangareddy district.

¶50

The Station House Officer, pulkal, Sangareddy district.

¶51

The District Collector, tVledchal Matkajgiri

¶52

One CC to SRt. DAS| RAMESH Advocate [OpUC]

¶53

Two CCs to Gp FOR CTVIL SUPPLIES ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶54

Two CCs to Gp for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTJ

¶55

10.Two CCs to Gp for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶56

Two CD Cooies KKS BM

¶57

HIGH COURT

¶58

DATED:03t0il2025

¶59

1t\t :i rA -,:
(1"<br>(
1+ ruB zffi
J: /
:.. l.
F.1; r-' i

¶60

ORDER

¶61

WP.No.12891 of 2025

¶62

DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS // 4t 4'/sftf

Vydyanath Jamedar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vydyanath Jamedar 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

Edigi Narayana , Kandivanam Narayana Goud , Vs State of Telangana

Bhadur Narsimulu Vs The Vice Chairman and Managing Directer

Jamalpur Hussainji Vs State of Telangana

Mr. K S S Niranjana Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Uyyala China Venkateswara Rao Vs State of Telangana

K. Kanaka Rao, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh