Dubagunta Gowri Sankar vs. The State Of Ap

Held

The Court, considering the facts and circumstances, submissions, and material on record, deemed it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition in the interest of justice. The Court directed the Joint Collector, Nellore, who is the designated Section 6-A authority, to complete the proceedings initiated under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, in accordance with the law. This completion was to be done as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The decision was to be communicated to the petitioners. The Court did not make any specific finding on the legality of the seizure itself, but focused on expediting the pending statutory proceedings.

Facts

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the seizure of a tanker and its contents, an industrial composite mixture, by respondent officials. The seizure occurred on January 24, 2019, during a vehicle check. The petitioners claimed to have purchased the stock with a valid GST invoice. The respondent officials alleged the stock was kerosene oil. The tanker and stock were seized on January 25, 2019, under a panchanama. Samples were collected. This Court, while admitting the petition, directed the release of the seized items upon furnishing bank guarantees of Rs. 2.00 lakhs and Rs. 3.00 lakhs. The petitioners stated that the seized items were released, but proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, initiated by the respondents, were not concluded.

Key Issues

1. Whether the seizure of the tanker and industrial composite mixture was illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of the Control Order, without proper initiation of proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioners contended that the seizure was unlawful as it was done without initiating proceedings under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. They argued that the stock was purchased with a valid GST invoice and was not kerosene oil as alleged. They also highlighted that the proceedings under Section 6-A, despite the interim order for release of goods, were not concluded. Revenue/State's arguments: The learned Assistant Government Pleader reiterated the averments in the counter, stating that samples collected from the detained lorry were sent for technical analysis to the Director, A.P. Forensic Science Laboratory, and the report was awaited. They submitted that upon receipt of the analysis report, the Section 6-A proceedings would be concluded.