Allowed

Ghanta Vara Prasad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC24 Jun 2022WP/17277/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition challenging a revision order dismissing a penalty demand without reasons. The Court held the order violated natural justice due to lack of reasoning, setting it aside and directing fresh orders with adequate hearing opportunity.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; direction to respondent to pass fresh orders after hearing and giving reasons; coercive steps against petitioner stayed pending disposal.

Ghanta Vara Prasad Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶2

W.P.No.17277 of 2022

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The petitioner was served with a demand notice No.447310/Vig/2018, dated 16.10.2018 calling upon him to pay certain penalties amounting to Rs.60,10,642/-.

¶5

Aggrieved by the said demand notice the petitioner had approached the 1^st respondent by way of a revision under Rule 35-A of the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. This revision was dismissed vide Memo No.10680/M.I(1)/2018, dated 10.02.2022. Aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of this writ petition.

¶6

Sri C.V.R. Rudra Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the order suffers from various infirmities both on merits and on account of violation of principles of natural justice. He would submit that the said order has been passed without issuing appropriate notice and without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He would also submit that the order does not set out any reasons and as such violates the basic requirement of principles of natural justice.

¶7

The learned Government pleader for Mines and Geology submits that the order of dismissal sets out the grounds for dismissal and that the said order has been passed after hearing the petitioner.

¶8

Without going into the question whether the petitioner had given adequate opportunity or not, this writ petition can be disposed of on the ground that the order does not contain any reasons.

¶9

RRR,J 2 W.P.No.17277 of 2022

¶10

It is settled law that quasi judicial orders of this nature have to contain reasons. Non-furnishing of reasons in such an order would amount to violation of principles of natural justice as it would not be clear as to whether the authority has applied its mind or not. Further, furnishing of reasons enables the higher authority to review the order in a proper manner. Non-furnishing of reasons would clearly handicap the higher authority and has been deprecated by the Courts.

¶11

In the circumstances, this writ petition is allowed setting aside the impugned order in Memo No.10680/M.I(1)/2018, dated 10.02.2022, with a direction to the 1^st respondent to pass fresh orders after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needless to say, the order passed by the 1^st respondent shall contain reasons. The respondents shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner, till the revision is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶13

_________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J.

¶14

24^th June, 2022 Js.

¶15

RRR,J 3 W.P.No.17277 of 2022

¶16

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶17

W.P.No.17277 of 2022

¶18

24^th June, 2022

¶19

Js.

Ghanta Vara Prasad v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanta Vara Prasad 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

D.Usha Rani Vs Gandham Chandrudu , IAS

Skml Constructions Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

R.Srinivasulu Naidu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ghanta Suresh Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Hiteshi Dutta Vs Union of India

Koti Lakshmi Narayana Vs State of Andhra Pradesh