VIJAYA LAKSHMI TRADERS Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner implores for writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 4th respondent in issuing letter in Ref.P/58/2019 dated 06.02.2020 instructing the 8th respondent/bank to encash the bank guarantees No.38921049336 for Rs.50,00,000/- and No.38921045988 for Rs.40,00,000/- (Rs.90,00,000/- in total) furnished by the petitioner and arrange Demand Draft (DD) for the said amount in the name of 6th respondent towards reimbursement of the cost of Custom Milled Rice (for short "CMR") paddy as illegal, arbitrary and against the conditions envisaged in the agreement dated 14.11.2019 entered into by the petitioner and the 2nd respondent and for a consequential order restraining the respondents from encashing the two bank guarantees and further directing them to continue the agreement till its finality.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that he is the sole proprietor of Vijaya Lakshmi Traders, Chelluru, Rayavaram Mandal, East Godavari District and deals with purchase/sale of notified agricultural produce livestock etc. The 2nd respondent entered into an agreement with the petitioner on 14.11.2019 for custom milling of paddy and transportation of custom milled rice (CMR) to FCI/APSCSCL godowns for the year 2019-2020 for the District of East Godavari. As per the terms of the agreement the petitioner has given bank guarantees No.38921049336 dated 14.11.2019 for Rs.50,00,000/- and No.38921045988 dated 14.11.2019 for Rs.40,00,000/- through the 8th respondent bank in favour of 6th respondent. The petitioner in terms of agreement has been procuring paddy and milling in his rice mill for supplying to FCI/APSCSCL. Recently, the petitioner supplied CMR to the 2nd respondent vide acknowledgments dated 21.01.2020 and 25.01.2020. The said delivery of rice was delayed at godown due to shortage of labour for unloading of the CMR. (a) While so, on 21.01.2020, the 7th respondent along with his staff visited the petitioner's rice mill and seized the stock available in the petitioner's rice mill under the cover of mediators report dated 21.01.2020. The allegations against the petitioner as per the mediator's report are that the 7th respondent got weighed the stock available in the petitioner's rice mill and came to conclusion that there was a deficit of 77.076 metric tons paddy worth of Rs.13,98,930/-. It was mentioned in the mediator's report as if the petitioner allegedly confessed before the officials that he imported the low cost rice through Chattisgarh from Sivam Traders, Machavaram and the same was being packed as CMR rice. The 7th respondent and his officials noted the details of the available rice as follows.

(3.) On 11.02.2020, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies took notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 3, 4, 5 and 7, Sri Hema Chandra, learned Standing Counsel took notice on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 6 and sought time for getting instructions. It is to be noted that while posting the matter to 17.02.2020, this court passed the following order. "Post on 17.02.2020 at the end of the Motion List. Till then, the respondent No.6 shall not invoke the bank guarantee furnished by the petitioner vide Bank Guarantee No.38921049336 for Rs.50,00,000/- and Bank Guarantee No.38921045988 for Rs.40,00,000/- (Rs.90,00,000/- in total) issued by respondent No.8, if already not invoked."