IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.10069 of 2001 Between: K. Rama Goud S/o Bala Goud R/o Doosgaon Village, Ditchpally Mandal, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The District Collector (Proh. & Excise) Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. 2 The Proh. & Excise Inspector, SHO Armoor, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS, directing the respondents not to take any action in pursuance of the Distraint Order as per the Proh. & Excise E.S.NZB/D2/487/92 dated 1-11-1999 in respect of Arrack Shop Armoor, Doosgaon Village and arrears of Excise year 1989-90, by considering the representation dated 5-10-1989, declaring the Distraint Order as per the Proh. & Excise E.S., NZB/D2/487/92, dated 1-11-1999 as illegal, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.B.SAI RAM GOUD Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No.10069 of 2001 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction not to take any action in pursuance of the distraint order as per the Proh. & Excise E.S.NZB/D2/487/92, dated 01.11.1999, in respect of arrack shop, Armoor, Doosgaon village and arrears of Excise year 1989-90 by considering the representation dated 5.10.1989 declaring the distraint order as illegal. A perusal of the affidavit and the counter affidavit goes to show that the distraint warrant has been issued without issuing any show cause notice and final orders. Therefore, in the absence of any show cause notice and final orders, the question of invoking the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act, does not arise. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case wherein the petitioner has to be afforded an opportunity before issuing the distraint warrant. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order is set aside. However, it is always open for the licencing authority/concerned authority to give a show-cause notice and pass final orders under the provisions of A.P.Excise Act and then, proceed under the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 21-04-2008 Prv ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{SRAVAN}