HEMADRI RICE MILL Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In W.P.No.2491 of 2019, the petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus declaring the order in Roc.No.CS.1/18/ECA-1/2019, dated 19.02.2019 issued by District Collector/Respondent No.2 directing to confiscate 100% of the value of the seized stock and encashment of bank guarantee as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short, "EC Act") and consequently set aside the said order.

(2.) The petitioner's case is thus:

(3.) So far as the case booked under section 6-A of EC Act, 1955 is concerned, since no material papers were served on the petitioner except the notice, he could not submit his explanation within three days as stipulated. Therefore, the petitioner appeared along with his counsel before the 2nd respondent on 19.01.2019 and filed a memo requesting to furnish copies of the relevant material to enable him to submit his explanation and to adjourn the case to a convenient future date. However, no order was passed on his memo as the 2 nd respondent was under the order of transfer to Visakhapatnam, but, the 2nd respondent issued proceedings dated 19.01.2019 directing release of the seized stock and accordingly stocks were released and handed over to petitioner on 23.01.2019. While the matters stood thus, the petitioner received a copy of the impugned order dated 19.02.2019 passed by the 2nd respondent without hearing the petitioner or considering his memo dated 19.01.2019. Hence the W.P.No.2491 of 2019 challenging the impugned order dated 19.02.2019.