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
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.
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No.4, it is stated that the impugned notice would be withdrawn and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
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.
(2020) 12 SCC 572
2023 (4) ALD 814 (TS)
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.
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
