Telangana High Court
K.Venkat Reddy, vs The State Of Telangana, on 24 July, 2024
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K.Lakshman
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.5591 of 2024
ORDER:
Heard Smt Rachna Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Mohammed Baseer Riyaz, Sri Somu Srinivas Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Sri Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 10.
2. This Writ Petition is filed questioning the notice in Form- II under Rule 3 of Telangana State Assigned Land (Prohibition of Transfer Rules-2017) dated 12.02.2024 issued by respondent No.4.
3. In the aforesaid notice, respondent No.4 stated that the petitioner is found to be the transferee of the assigned lands as specified in the schedule of the said notice. Petitioner is in possession of the subject property as an heir. Therefore, respondent No.4 directed the petitioner to submit explanation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the said notice as to why he should not be summarily evicted from the said assigned land. Petitioner without submitting the explanation to the said notice, filed the present Writ Petition 2 contending that he is the owner and possessor of the subject land since 42 years and the assignees are not in possession of the subject property, no details of assignment proceedings and conditions of assignment etc., are furnished, names of the assignees are wrongly mentioned in the remarks column of the impugned notice, reply format of Form-II prescribed under the relevant Act and Rules was not adopted and on the other hand, there is no incident of transfer of any assignment to the petitioner.
4. Petitioner instead of submitting explanation to respondent No.4 filed the present Writ Petition and this Court vide order dated 01.03.2024, directed the parties to maintain status quo as on the said date.
5. Perusal of the record would reveal that respondent No.4 has issued notice dated 06.07.2022 to the petitioner herein. The said notice was under challenge in W.P.No.30079 of 2022. This Court vide order dated 01.02.2024, allowed the said Writ Petition, setting aside the impugned show cause notice dated 06.07.2022 issued by respondent No.4 herein on the ground that respondent No.4 has issued the said notice without mentioning the details etc., and it is defective notice.
3
6. In paragraph No.11 of the counter affidavit of respondent No.4, it is stated that the impugned notice would be withdrawn and fresh notice will be issued to the petitioner by mentioning the details. Thus, this Court granted liberty to respondent No.4 to initiate fresh proceedings by furnishing details such as assignment proceedings, name of the assignee, conditions of assignment etc, and violation thereof, so that the petitioner would have reasonable opportunity to effectively defend such proceedings. Thereafter, respondent No.4 has issued impugned notice dated 12.02.2024 specifically mentioning the name of the village, survey number, extent, description of the land, name of the transferee, assignee and the nature of transfer and date. Therefore, petitioner has to submit explanation to the said notice. Petitioner can also raise the aforesaid grounds before respondent No.4 by way of submitting explanation to the show cause notice dated 12.02.2024. Instead of doing so, petitioner filed the present Writ Petition.
7. Mr.Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 10 placing reliance on the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner of Central Excise, Haldia 4 vs. Krishna Wax Private Limited1 and the principle laid down by this Court in Pillarisetti Harinath Babu and another vs. Special Deputy Collector, Khammam District and others 2, would contend that the petition filed by the petitioner challenging show cause notice dated 12.02.2024 is not maintainable. In Paragraph No.15 of the said judgment in Commissioner of Central Excise's case (1 supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court categorically held that the Writ Petition should normally not be entertained against mere issuance of show cause notice. In the said case, the High Court entertained the Writ Petition challenging the show cause notice initially and directed the department to prima facie consider whether there was material to proceed with the matter. Thus the Hon'ble Apex Court clarified that the Writ Petition is maintainable challenging the show cause notice under certain circumstances. The said principle was also reiterated in Pillarisetti Harinath Babu's case (2 supra).
8. As discussed supra, in compliance with the order dated 01.02.2024 in W.P.No.30079 of 2022, this Court granted liberty to respondent No.4 to initiate fresh action. In compliance with the said order, respondent No.4 has issued impugned notice dated 12.02.2024. 1 (2020) 12 SCC 572 2 2023 (4) ALD 814 (TS) 5 Petitioner has to submit explanation to the same and respondent No.4 has to consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
9. It is opt to note that Sri Chalakani Venkat Yadav, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 to 10 contended that respondent No.4 intentionally issued defective notices to the petitioner, so that he can approach and get favourable orders. Respondent No.4 is hand in glove with the petitioner.
10. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to submit explanation with all relevant documents to the notice dated 12.02.2024 to respondent No.4 within 10 days from today and on filing such explanation, respondent No.4 shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders by putting the petitioner, respondent Nos.5 to 10 on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing. He shall pass a reasoned order and communicate a copy of the order to the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 to 10. He shall complete the said exercise within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till then, respondent No.4 is directed not to proceed further pursuant to the notice dated 12.02.2024.
6
11. Respondent No.4 shall pass orders basing on the material available on record without being influenced by any of the observations/findings made by this Court in this Writ Petition or in W.P.No.30079 of 2022. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 24.07.2024 Note: Issue CC in two days b/o vsl