The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ of lvandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction declaring- (e) that the Vigilance and Enforcement Directorate, the second Respondent herein, has no power, authority or jurisdiction to interfere with the business and commercial activities of the petitioner and of its related companies like M/s Emaar Properties PJSC, M/s EHTpL, either in extercise of its powers derived under G.O.Ms.No.269 dated 11.06..1985 or G.O.Ms.No.370 dated 11.06.1985 or otherwise, (f) that the search and seizure conducted by the 2nd respondent and 3rd on the premises of EHTpL, the petitioner and its related companies as without jurisdiction, illegal, unlawful and arbitrary, (g) that the interim report dated 10.0'1-201'1 of the second Respondent bearing C.No.1215A/ and ElD4l201o as without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and as vitiated by 13 gross non-observance of the princrples of natural justice and that the same is not binding on the Petitioner and its related companies, namely, I\,4/s Emaar Properties PJSC and ElvlcF. (h) that the notice dated 25.04.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent as without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and that the same is not binding on the Petitioner and issue a consequential direction directing the 2nd and 3rd Respondents (v) to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents return to the Petitioner all the records and materials seized by the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the course of the said illegal search and seizure acts (vi) restrain the 2nd and 3rd respondents from interfering in any manner whatsoever, either under the pretext of enquiry by the second and third respondents or otherwise, with the business and commercial activity of the petitioner and its other related companies, namely, f\zlls Emaar Properties PJSC and EIvGF (vii) not to take any action against the petitioner on the basis of the said interim report of the 2nd respondent. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2011(WPMP. NO: 16479 0F 2011) Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the circumstances stated rn the affidavit flled in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay the operation of the notice dated 25.04.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent and to issue interim directions directing the 2nd and 3rd Respondents herein not to interfere in any manner with the bujsiness and commercial activities of the Petitioner and its other related companies, viz., M/s Emaar properties pJSC and EMGF on the basrs of interim report dated 1o-o1 .2011 of the second Respondent bearing c.No.'1215/V & ElD4l201o or otherwise, pending disposal of this writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : R.MADHAVI Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LN{SHMAN WRIT PEf,ITION No.136O1 of 2O11 ORDER: Despite listing the matter in the caption For Dismissal, even today there is no representation.

2. This writ petition is hled seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction declaring (A) that the Vigilance and Enforcement Directorate, the second Respondent herein, has no power, authority or jurisdiction io interfere with the business and commercial activities of the Petitioner and of its related companies like M/s Emaar Properties PJSC, M/s EHTPL, either in exercise of its powers derived under G.O.Ms.No'269 dated 11.06.1985 or G.O.Ms.No.37O dated 11.O6.1985 or otherwise, (B) that the search and seizure conducted by tJle 2nd respondent and 3rd on the premises of EHTPL, the petitioner and its related companies as without jurisdiction, illegal, unlawful and arbitrary, (C) that the interim report dated 10'O 1'2O 1 1 of the second Respondent bearing C'No'1215/V and E lD4 I 2O1O as without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and as vitiated by gross non-observance of the KI,J w.P.No.l360l ot20II 2 principles of natural justice and that the same is not binding on the Petitioner and its related companies, namely, M/s Emaar Properties PJSC and EMGF. (D) that the notice dated 25.04.2011 issued by the 3rd respondent as without jurisdiction, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and that the same is not binding on the Petitioner; and issue a consequential clirection directing the 2nd and 3rd Respondents (i) to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents return to the Petitioner all the records and materials seized by the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the course of the said illegal search and seizure acts [ii) restrain the 2nd and 3rd respondents from interfering in any manner whatsoever, either under the pretext ofenquiry by the second and third respondents or otherwise, with the business and commercial activity of the petitioner and its other related companies, namely, M/s Emaar properties pJSC ald EMGF (iii) not to take any action against the petitioner on the basis of the said interim report of the 2nd respondent, and (iv) pass such other order or orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. Respondent Nos.2 and 3 frled counter contending that the averments of the petitioner that the conduct of the 2"d and 3.d respondent is highly arbitrar5r, illegal and _/ KL,J w.P No.l360l of 20r I ., without any law and also interfered in their business and commercia-l activities is not true and correct. As per G.O.Ms.No.269 dated 11.06.1985 and G.O.Ms.No.5O4, dated 25. 11.1997, the V & E Dept has got every right to enter into any business premises, and collect information to ascertain the misuse of Government funds/property and a-lso leakage of Revenue, due to the Government.

4. They have further contended that the petitioner's company is a Joint Venture Company with APIIC arrd the APIIC has allotted Government la4ds to the petitioner's company for the purpose of development by investing 260/o of share holding in the above company. As the public money and propert5r is involved and the allegations are made about the irregularities in the allotment of Lands by the APIIC to various companies including the petitioner's company. As a part of enquiry the 3'd respondent and his ofhcials collected information from APIIC in the .above transaction and also collected additional information from the petitioner's company. As KL,J W.P.No.l3601 of 20l1 4 I the public funds/property is involved in the petitioner's company the Vigilance and Enforcement Department has jurisdiction and powers and authority to inspect the company for detection of irregularities, misuse of funds and leakage of revenue, due to the Government. As per the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of A.P in writ petition No.29358 of 2Oi0, the 2"d respondent hled counter aflidavit along with an interim report with the relevant documents on 10.01.20i 1. 2"d and 3.d respondents have hled copies of G.O.Ms.No.269 dated

11.06.1985, G.O.Ms.No.270 dated 11.05.i985 and G.O.Ms.No.5O4 dated 25.71.1997 which also shows the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have jurisdiction.

5. Though the said counter was hled on 07.06.2011, petitioner did not file any reply or rejoinder adverting to the same.

6. This writ petition is pending from 2Ol1 onwards. There is no interim order. KL.J W.P.No 1360 t of 20i I 5

7. In the light of the same, this Court is of the view that petitioner herein failed to make out any case or any irregularity committed by the respondents. This writ petition is liable to dismissed and accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

8. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// A SD/. A, JAYASREE ANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER To,

1. One CC to R.II/ADHAVI, Advocate. [OPUC] 2. fwo CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP YY HIGH COURT DATED:1010412025 1y\E Sl4p c t,: i,,r IoJUL M ili\... r \...''' ..-., ' . I (. P. :,_ | ORDER WP.No.13601 of 2011 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS G *{finA tCr. <\Iia,