Allowed

M/s Gagan Minerals v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC16 Aug 2021WP/14681/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Single Judge allowed a writ petition challenging the legal validity of a notice issued by the Investigating Officer to attach immovable properties. The court held that since the challenged properties were not covered by the relevant Government Order, the investigating officer lacked the competence to issue the notice, and thus, it was set aside.

What did the court decide?

The impugned notice attaching the aforesaid properties was set aside, and the Writ Petition was allowed.

M/s Gagan Minerals Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION No.14681 OF 2021

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for 1^st respondent and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the Advocate General for respondents 2 and 3, and learned Government Pleader for Mines for respondent 4 and Sri P.S.P. Suresh Kumar appearing for respondent 5.

¶4

The petitioner assails the legal validity of the notice, dated nil, of the Investigating Officer of Crime Investigation Department, attaching the immovable properties therein, relating to the petitioner in Crime No.170 of 2018 of Pedakakani Police Station, Guntur District.

¶5

G.O.Ms.No.13 was issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh attaching certain properties, which are enumerated therein in Crime No.7 of 2015 under Sections 3 and 5 of the Andhra Pradesh Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999, relating to the aforesaid crime registered by II Town Police Station, Rajamundry, East Godavari District. The said G.O. was issued on 03.02.2021. On an assumption that the lands covered by Sy.Nos.114/1, 114/3, 114/4, 115/2 and 94/P of Gurijepalli Village, Santhamagulur Mandal, are covered by the aforesaid G.O, the Investigating Officer in the above Crime No.7 of 2015, issued the

¶6

¶7

impugned notice, dated nil, attaching the aforesaid properties along with other properties.

¶8

Now, the petitioner assails the legal validity of the said notice on the ground that when the aforesaid properties are not covered by the G.O. that the Investigating Officer is not competent to issue any notice attaching the said properties.

¶9

Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 and 3, on instructions, would submit that it is a fact that the aforesaid lands covered by Sy.Nos.114/1, 114/3, 114/4, 115/2 and 94/P are not covered by the G.O.

¶10

If that be the case, the Investigating Officer is not competent under law to attach the said properties by the impugned notice. Therefore, the impugned notice is liable to be set aside.

¶11

In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed setting aside the impugned notice attaching the aforesaid properties.

¶12

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶13

_______________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶14

Date: 16-08-2021 AKN

¶15

¶16

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶17

WRIT PETITION No.14681 OF 2021

¶18

Date: 16-08-2021

¶19

AKN

M/s Gagan Minerals v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Gagan Minerals v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kala Traders, Vs The State of A.P.

Sathi Vinod Kumar Reddy, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Satyamesetti Hari Kumar Vs State of Ap

Veeraballi Krishna Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kondareddy Narayana Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

B.Mahesh Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh