The High Court · 2025

Petitior uncler 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 stay all further prt>ceedings pursuant to the Form-1 Distraint Order in proceedings 8.150612025-2, dzrted 09.09.2025, issued by the gth Respondent, and any consequential actions thereto, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI BHARGAVA KRISHNA L counsel for l.he Respondents No.1 & 2: GP FoR crvtl suppLrEs Gounsel for l:he Respondents No.3 & 4: SRI K. DEVENDAR, S.C. FOR TSCSC Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 to 10: GP FOR REVENUE The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON,BLE SMT. .IUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI IIIRIT PETITIO N No.3 10 11 OF 2O2O ORDER: In this writ Petition, the petitioner is challenging the distraint order dated og.og.2025 issued by responclent Nq.9, as violative of principlesofnaturaljusticeand.contrarytotheTelanganaRevenue Recovery Act, 1864.

2.Hearclthelearnecitroufls€iforthepetitioner,learned Government pleacler for civii Supplies appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr.K.Devend"ar, learned Standing counsel for .Telangana state civil Supplies corporation (TSCSC) appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4'

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner rvhile reiterating the submissions made in the rvrit affidavit submitted that no demand notice was issued to the petitioner and the d'istraint order refers to aSumofRs.8,35,l7,27o.o9l-andthateveniftheNlsPshortfall stock is taken into consi,leratiorr, it's value would not go beyond Rs.6 crore and odd-

4.Learned.GovernmentPlead.erforCivilsupplies,o[the other hand, submitted that during the panchanama proceedings conducted on 31.07.2025'ta verif5z the pacdSr stocks of Rabi 2023' 24and'Kharif2o24-2Ssupptiedtothepetitioner,therewasno 2 - stock founC available for Rabi 2023-24 and there was a short fatl of stock for l..harif 2024-25. The petitioner himself has admitted that due to urrseasonal rains, the padd1, stock got discoloured and damaged and therefore, it u.as sold to iiquor factories, as it rvas unfit for cMR rice. It is also submitted that, though three (3) days time was given to the petitioner to submit his explanation before the collector, the petitioner has not availed the said facility and therefore, the distraint order dated o9.o9.2o2s, has been issued.

5. Le:arned Standing counsel for corporation also reiterated the above said submissions and submitted that the petitioner has intentioneLlly misguided the authorities u,hen the rrerification of stock wa:r being done, and that subsequently, he himself has admitted the shortfall of cMR padd-y and therefore, the distraint ord.er is rt:asonable and sustainable.

6. L,:arned counsel for the petitioner norv prays for some more time to s;ubmit his explanation before the competent authority /Collecto::.

7. Hlaving regard to the rival submissions and the material on record, t-his court finds that after conducting panchanama proceedings on 3L.o7.2o2s, it was found that there was a shortfall of paddy and the petitioner was given three days time to make his -- 3 submissions. But, the petitioner failed to make any submissions and therefore, the respondents have issued distraint order dated og.og.2o25. However, this court is of the opinion that before issuing the distraint order, the respondents ought to have issued a demand notice and thereafter, if the petitioner did not make the payment as per the demand notice, they could have issued the distraint order and proceeded with the recovery under the Revenue Recovery Act. Since the said procedure has not been followed, the impugned distraint order is set aside, however, with liberty to proceed in accordance vvith law. The petitioner is also permitted to make his submissions before the authorities and the same shall be considered by the authorities while finalizing the demand notice'

8. with the above direction, this writ Petition is disposed of There shall be no order as to costs g. Misceilaneous applications, if any, pending in this writ Petition, shalt stand closed. SD/-MOMINA MEHAR ISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY// SECTTON OFFICER To 1 2 3 Ambed ,hue (Civil SuPPlies) kar Tblangana State The Special-Chief-Secretary to Government odiart-fienll State of Telangana, Dr' B'R' Sebretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana' The Ex-Officio secretary to Government, c^Onsumers..Affairs, Food and civil Suoolies Department, State of Telaffini,ti"it supplies Bhavan, Erramanjil, Soinajiguda, Hyderabad, Telangana' The commissioner, consumers-Affairs, Food and civil Supplies Department' State of Telangana, Civil Suppl'r#' gf,i'an, Erramanjil' Sornaiiguda' Hyderabad, Telangana'

4. The Vic:e-Chairman/[t/anaging Director, TSCSCL, Telangana State Civil S.upplies ColPoration Ltd., Civil Supplies Bhavan, Erramanjii, Somajiguda, I Hyderabad, Telangana. /

5. The District Collector, Nizamabad District, Telangana. 6. The Collector (CS)/Additional Collector (CS), Nizamabad District, Telangana. 7. The Dislrict lVlanager, TSCSCL, Nizamabad District, Telangana. 8. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Nizamabad Division, Nizamabad District, Telangana

9. The Tal'rsildar, Sirikonda [VIandal, Nizamabad District, Terangana. 10.The Deputy Tahsildar (CS), Sirikonda IVandal, Nizamabad District, Telanga na. 1 1. One CC: to SRI BHARGAVAKRISHNA 1., Advocate [oPUC] 12.Two COs to-G.P_for Civil Supplies, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderal>ad. [OUT]

13. One CC; to SRI K. DEVENDAR, S.C. for TSCSC tOpUCI 14.Two Ctls to GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 1S..Two CD Copies MP BS HIGH COURT DATED:03/1 112025 THE S ( J * il 5 i{l18 2026 * ORDER WP.No.3101 1 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS $ +"