IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 23405 of 2002 BETWEEN: Gali Satyavathi, W/o. Late Laxmana Swamy, R/o. Cherla, Cherla Mandal, Khammam District. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Prohibition & Excise Station. Venkatapuram, Venkatapuram Mandal, Khammam District. 2 The District Collector, Khammam District, Khammam. 3 The Mandal Revenue Officer, Cherla Mandal, Cherla, Khammam District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the first respondent the Station House Officer, Prohibition & Excise Station, Venkatapuram Mandal, Khammam District in issuing impugned order dated 18.9.2002 directing the petitioner herein to pay the arrears for the excise year 1972-73 with 18% interest after 30 years to an amount of Rs.24,578.85 ps. which was due by the petitioner's late husband, failing which action will be taken against the petitioner herein under Revenue Recovery Act 1864 is illegal and void and the same is contrary to law and barred by limitation and consequently direct the respondents not to insist the petitioner for arrears for the excise year 1972- 73 which was due by her husband, and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.MUMMANENI.SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioner questions the notice issued by the first respondent dated 18.09.2002 wherein she was informed to pay an amount of Rs.24,578.85 ps. to the Excise department relating to the dues for the excise year 1972-73 by her husband and also to pay interest at 18% per year and that she has not cleared the dues. Therefore, it was informed to her that the Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.320 (Revenue Excise-II) Department dated 10.06.2002 to avail the opportunity of one time settlement waiving off the interest otherwise action would be taken under the Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 (for short ‘the Act’). 2. The petitioner, except questioning the said notice, has not raised any other contentions with regard to the arrears said to have been due and payable by her husband. 3. The respondents filed a counter stating that the husband of the petitioner viz. G. Lakshamana Swamy fell in arrears of Rs.24,578.85 ps. in respect of the today shop, Cherla Tegada for the year 1972-73 and the properties of the husband of the petitioner were attached on 26.04.1983 for realization of the arrears but the same could not be sold for want of sufficient bid. It is stated that the order of the Government in the aforesaid G.O. offering to avail one time settlement on waiver of interest fixed up to 31.08.2002 was extended up to 31.12.2002 and thereafter it was extended till October 2007. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that if the petitioner does not want to avail the benefit of the said order, the respondents cannot proceed against her, without following due procedure prescribed in law, under the Act. 5. If the petitioner is declined to avail the benefit of the aforesaid Government order, it is needless to observe that the respondents have to follow the procedure prescribed under the Act for recovery of the dues payable by her husband from out of the properties inherited or succeeded by her. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J July 21, 2008 DSK