Syed Mahmood v. 1. The Union of lndia

4. Nowhera Shaik, D/o.Late Sri Shaik Nanne Saheb, Aged about.S2 Yrs., Occ.Business R/o. H.No.9-4-1341N51231114, HS Residency, Valli Colony, Toli Chowki, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly ore in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondents, more particularly Respondent-2 in interfering in respect of the subject propefiies to an extent of Ac.0- 10 gts. in Sy.No.230lAN1l2l1 and also land to an extent of Ac.0-O2%Gts. in Sy.No.230/AA/1/1/1 situated at Aloo(V), Chevelta(M), RR District under the guise of including the properties in Lot No. Lot No.17 vide Notification No. MSTC/HYD/Di rectorate of EnforcemenV 2l HYD I 25-26-2467 2, Dt. 1 6.08. 20 I I for auction as illegal and arbitrary and against the principals of natural justice as I I l I the auction is taken without any prior notice to petitioner and also in violation of At1.14, 21 & 300 of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent-2 not to interfere in respect of the subject properties to an extent of Ac.O- 10 gts. in Sy.No.23OlAN1l2l1 and also land to an extent of Ac.0-02 % Gts. in Sy.No.230/AA/1/1/1 situated at Aloor(V), Chevella(M), RR District. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to direct the Respondent-2 not to interfere in respect of the subject properties to an extent of Ac.0-10 gts. in Sy.No.230lAAl 1l2l 1 and also land to an extent of Ac.O- O2 /z Gls. in Sy.No.230/ AN 11111 situated at Aloo(V), Chevella(M), RR District, under the guise of Notification No. MSTC/HYD/Directorate of EnforcemenU2 / HYD|25-26-24672, Dt. 16.08.2019 pending final disposal of main Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N. ASHOK KUMAR Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 and 2: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.3 and 4:-- The Court made the following: OROER I I 1 I i Y THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.3O792 of 2025 ORDER: The petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, particularly respondent No.2- Enfor'cement Directorate, in interfering with his subject properties admeasuring Ac.O-10 guntas in Sy.No.230 IAA/ 1/211 and Ac.O-O2Yz guntas in Sy.No.23O/AAl ll1ll situated at Aloor Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Sri N. Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel representing Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, Iearned Deputy Solicitor General ol India, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has lawfully purchased the subject properties through registered sale deeds in July, 2023 after conducting due diligence, and has since been in peaceful possession, supported by revenue records and a valid Pattadar Pass Book. He submits that respondent No.2 arbitrarily included the subject properties in an auction uide notification dated

16.08.2019 (Lot No. 17) u.ithout issuing any prior notice or affording Lhe petitioner an opportunitl, of hearing, thereby violating principles of 2 natural justice and fundamental rights undcr Articles 14, 21, and 3OOA of the Constitution. He submits that tl're petitioner has no connection whatsoever witJr respondent No.4, who is accused of financial fraud, and asserts that the subject properties changed hands legally before the petitioner acquired it. He further submits that similar relief has been granted by this Court in W.P.No.24146 of 2025, where the auction of attached properties was stayed. He further submits that the continued interference by respondent No.2 wiil cause irreparable loss to the petitioner, as the subject properties are petitioner's sole means of livethood.

4. Upon considering the aforesand submissions and perusing the material on record, this Court is of the considered vierr"' that the subject properties had already been attached / seized by respondent No.2 in connection with proceedings against respondent No.4 prior to the petitioner's alleged purchase in the year 2023. lt is not in dispute that the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in connectcd proceedings, had already directed the Enforcement Directorate to proceed with the sale of such attached properties through public auction. The said direction of the Hontrle Supreme Court overrides any contrary claim of "/ -/ II 3 ownership made subsequently. Further, once the properties are under attachment and seizure pursuant to orders of a competent court or authority, no right or title can pass to a subsequent purchaser, evbn if such purchase is done through registered sa,le deeds, unless and until the attachment is lifted. The petitioner, therefore, calnot claim any superior title or right over the subject properties, especially when the subject properLies were already the subject matter of seizure proceedings at the time of his alleged purchase. Any such purchase is hit by the doctrine of "caveat emptor" (buyer beware), cannot be protected under writ jurisdiction.

5. Accordin(ly,.tlis Court finds no merit in the Writ Petition and holds that the petitioner has no enforceable legal right warranting interference under Articl e 226 of the Constitution of India and the same is dismissed. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, il any, stald closed. Sd/- P.C. SULEKHA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. One CC to Sri N. Ashok Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of India {OPUCI 3. Two CD Copies T J/MP -M I I HIGH COURT DATED:1411012025 ORDER WP.No.30792 of 2025 0 7 tiB 2U6 * C.r-." ' . * I 6''L * I DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS Ks a<'fifz-e ,