Disposed

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Telangana HC17 Nov 2020WP/19230/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the illegal seizure of black jaggery, rods, powder, and a vehicle, the High Court directed the Dy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise to finalize confiscation proceedings within four weeks upon petitioner's explanation submission.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 3 to finalize confiscation proceedings within four weeks.

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa Vs The State of Telangana and 4… — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE F TE LAN GANA AT H YDSJfJiDO

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND rWcr\rri"

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶6

Betwee n:

¶7

WR|T^pETtTtON NO: 19230 OF 2020

¶8

,,4r^ Ghanshyam .^{Das Kanrya. S/o. Late} Sri Harikish occ. Busineds. nlolq-z-192. Begumbazar. Hyderabadan

¶9

Kanwa. Aged 52 years.

¶10

AND

¶11

...PET|flONER

¶12

The State of Telanoana, Represented by principal Secretary, prohibition and , FI :' :^ ?"-p,11,19 1r, 9 1c^{retiii, i H ;; ;,.;'b; j.' ili, n} s,^n, z rne uommrssroner of prohibition and Excise. A,4ukhiam Jha Road, Abkari ^^{thavan,2nd Floor. Hyderabad.}

¶13

The Dy. Commissionei-. prohibition and Excrse, prohibition and Excise Department. Hyderabad District.

¶14

The Asst. Excise Suoerintendent of police. Taskforce Wing, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Station ttouse onicer, iion,onion i"r".l.Jd'Ltron, onoorper. Hyderabad

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may 6e pleased to issue an order, direction or writ, more particularly in the nlture of wrii of Mandamus thereby declaring the seizure of black jaggery 242 bags of 40 kgs each total g680 Kgs, NavasagaramBagas Rods numbering 15 each weighing 25 Kgs., total 375 Kgs. and also Naysagar Powder of 8 Bags, each weighing 45 Kgs. total 360 Kgs., and Honda Activa vehicle bearing no. TS-'1 3-EK-1830 from the godown of the petitioner bearing municipal No. 18-4-4213/7, Shamsher Gunj, Hyderabad in Crime No.^.123 of 2020 by the respondent no. 3 to 5, is not only illegal, arbitrary but also contrary to the law and violation of the orders of this Hon'ble Court affecting the rights as envisaged under Article 19,20,21 and 14 of Constitution of lndia, thereby directing the Respondent No.3 to 5, to release the seized stock of the petitioner forthwith.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 to 5, to release the 242 bags of black^jaggery of 40 kgs each total 9680 Kgs seized in COR No. 123120 pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶20

lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased direct the Respondent No.3 to 5, to release the two wheeler i.e. Honda Activa Vehicle bearing No. TS-13-EK-1830 seized in COR No. 123120 pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI DAMODAR MUNDRA

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION AND EXCISE The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

¶25

HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE P'NAVEENRAO}

¶26

WRIT PETIT^{ION No.1 9230 OF2020}

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard learned^{Counsel for the petitioner andiearned} Government^{Pleaderfor Prohibitionand Excise'}

¶29

This writ^{petitionis fiied prayingto declare seizureof biack} jaggery 242 bags of 40^{Kgs each total 9680 Kgs'} Navasagarambagas^{Rodsnumbering15 each weighing 25 Kgs} totalling 375 Kgs^{ancl Navsagar Powderof 8 bags each rveighing 45} Kgs totalling 360 Kgs^{and Honda Activa vehicle bearing No'TS i3} EK 1830, as illegal.

¶30

When the matter is taken up,^{learned counselfor the} petitioner submits that on 09.O9 .2020, notice was^{issued in} confiscation proceedings. In response to^{the said notice, petitioner} submitted his explanation on 25.09.2020 and^{petitioner willbe} satisfied if a direction is issued to frnalize the confiscation proceedings expeditiously.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave of the Court to make application for grant of interim custody of the goods, pending finalization of confiscation proceedings.

¶32

Having regard to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Deputy Commissioner-3.d respondent to finalize the confiscation proceedings as expeditiously as possible, preferably i.r,ithin a period of four u,eeks. In the meantime, if petitioner liles application for release of goods pending confiscation proceedings, and ii there is likelihood ol dela1, in finalizing thc confiscatior-r proceedings, the said application may be considered and

¶33

¶34

appropriate decision be made and communicated to the petitioner.

¶35

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶36

SD/-N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTISN OFFICER

To,

The Principal Secretary, Prohibition and Excise Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana

¶42

The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, lt/ukhram Jha Road, Abkari Bhavan, 2nd Floor, Hyderabad.

¶43

The Dy.Commissioner, Prohibition and Excise, Prohibition and Excise Department, Hyderabad District.

¶44

The Asst. Excise Superintendent of Police, Taskforce Wing, Hyderabad.

¶45

The Station House Officer, Prohibition Excise Station, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad.

¶46

One CC to Sri Damodar Mundra, Advocate IOPUCI

¶47

7, Two CCs to GP for Prohibition and Excise,^{High Courtfor the State of Telangana} at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶48

B. Two CD CoPies

Smt

HIGH^COURT

DATED:17/11/2020

ORDER

WP.No.'t9230 ol²⁰²⁰

<br>6'
7
1 $e ST4 14.
(
J
o 23 No'J 2U0 a
-l:
:S DA-T C c9-.,/:./

¶56

DISPOSING OF THE WP

¶57

WITHOUT COSTS

¶58

SN e-\ \D^co P ra )r a-:\t *

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

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

Rathlavath Rekya Nayak Vs The State of Telangana

Ravipati Pushpalatha,Prakasam Dist Vs S.P,Mahabubnagar,and 4

Smt. Allada Neelamma, Vs The Govt. of Ap rep.by by its Principal Secretary to Govt.

Sri Ramalayam Temple Self Style Committee Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Sri Kiran Kumar Mittapalli Vs The State of Telangana

Yeruvva Narapareddy Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others