SHEELA SRINIVAS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KARIMNAGARDIST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a Rice Miller. He challenges the seizure of various quantities of paddy and rice effected by the 2nd respondent through Panchanama dated 10-10-2002. It is the contention of the petitioner that the 2nd respondent, who has effected the seizure, has no jurisdiction and there was gross misuse of power on his part in effecting the seizure, which resulted in dislocation of the functioning of the mill and the business.

(2.) When the writ petition came up for admission on 24-10-2002, the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies has taken time to obtain instructions and to produce the records. Accordingly, the learned Government Pleader has argued the matter on the basis of the instructions and placed the relevant record before this Court.

(3.) Through the Panchanama dated 10-10-2002, the 2nd respondent has effected seizure of 549 bags paddy weighing 384.30 quintals and 440.70 quintals of rice. The petitioner alleges that in view of the notification issued by the Government of India on 15-2-2002 and the Memo dated 27-3-2002, issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh, there are no restrictions as to stock or movement of the paddy and rice and, as such, the seizure was illegal and without jurisdiction on the face of it. The basis on which the seizure was effected, is that certain quantity of rice, which was released at the Mandal Level Stocking Point, meant for Food for Work, was alleged to have been diverted to the Mill of the petitioner and, in that view of the matter, in exercise of power under A.P. State Public Distribution System Control Order 2001 (for short "the Control Order'), the seizure was effected. The learned Government Pleader tries to sustain the seizure on the basis of the provisions of the said Control Order.