THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 17462 OF 2003 Dated: 01.12.2011 Between : Dr.A.Lakshminarayana Setty … Petitioner And Mandal Revenue Officer and another … Respondents The Court made the following:- THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 17462 OF 2003 O R D E R: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the demand notice dated 26.07.2003 issued by the 1st respondent- Mandal Revenue Officer, Anantapur under Section 25 of the A.P.Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short, ‘the Act’) for attachment of immovable property belonging to the petitioner for realization of a sum of Rs.3,13,046.25 paise allegedly due to the 2nd respondent, is arbitrary and illegal. It is pleaded that the petitioner is a retired Civil Surgeon and the plot in question was purchased by him out of his income wherein he has constructed a residential house. It is stated that the petitioner’s son along with some others had incorporated a private limited company in the name and style of M/s. Viswabharathi Steels Private Limited and the said company had fallen into arrears with the 2nd respondent towards energy charges to the tune of Rs.3,13,046.25 paise. It is contended that the house property in question being totally self acquired property of the petitioner even assuming that the amounts are due from the Private Limited Company to which the petitioner’s son is a Managing Director, the same cannot be attached invoking the provisions of the Act. Despite notice, no counter affidavit is filed on behalf of the respondents. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court that in response to the representation made by the petitioner on 01.08.2003, the 2nd respondent issued a reply during the pendency of this writ petition on 22.08.2003 reiterating the fact that the impugned demand notice has been issued for recovery of the amounts due from the company to which the petitioner’s son is the Managing Director. Having regard to the admitted fact that the petitioner is not liable for the arrears allegedly due to the 2nd respondent and the property in question is the self acquired property of the petitioner, the impugned demand notice cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. However, it is left open to the respondents to take the appropriate steps against the M/s. Viswabharathi Steels Private Limited company following due process of law. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. ___________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 01.12.2011 Ivd