M/S. Sai Santoshi Industries vs. The State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sai Santoshi Industries, filed a writ petition challenging the respondents' alleged interference with their rice mill and attempts to seize commodities without due process. The petitioner contended that the action was illegal, arbitrary, and violative of their constitutional rights. The respondents, through written instructions, stated that the petitioner had an agreement with the State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited for the delivery of 6196 metric tons of Custom Milled Rice (CMR) for the Khariff and Rabi 2022-23 seasons but failed to deliver it within the stipulated time. The respondents denied attempting to enter the mill or seize stocks, claiming the petition was based on mere apprehension. The Court had granted time for a counter-affidavit, which was not filed.

Held

The Court noted that the respondents, through written instructions, admitted that the petitioner had an agreement for the delivery of 6196 metric tons of Custom Milled Rice (CMR) for the Khariff and Rabi 2022-23 seasons and had failed to deliver it within the stipulated time. However, the respondents denied attempting to enter the mill or seize stocks, claiming the writ petition was filed based on mere apprehension. Despite being granted time to file a counter-affidavit, no such affidavit was filed by the respondents. In light of the unfiled counter-affidavit and the written instructions provided, the Court deemed it appropriate to close the writ petition with a direction to the respondents. The direction stipulated that if the respondents intended to take any action against the petitioner for the non-delivery of CMR, they must follow the due process of law. The Court did not decide on the legality of the alleged interference or seizure, as the counter-affidavit was not filed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the action of the respondents in interfering with the petitioner's rice mill and attempting to seize commodities without following due process of law is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the principles of natural justice under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the respondents' actions were without following due process, making them illegal and arbitrary, and infringing upon their fundamental rights. They sought a writ of mandamus to prevent such interference. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, through written instructions, stated that the petitioner had failed to deliver Custom Milled Rice (CMR) as per an agreement with the State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. They denied attempting to enter the mill or seize stocks, asserting the petition was based on apprehension. They did not file a counter-affidavit.