Facts of the Case
The petitioner, P. Rajesh Kumar, was carrying on a
lawful business dealing in tobacco products under a valid licence and GST
registration, while regularly paying applicable GST and taxes. Despite the
Supreme Court having granted an interim stay against the Telangana Government's
Notification No. 501/FSS-1/2022 dated 07.01.2022, the petitioner alleged
that various State authorities were continuously interfering with his business
activities. Aggrieved by such interference, the petitioner approached the
Telangana High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking protection
against illegal obstruction of his lawful business operations.
Issues Involved
- Whether
the State authorities could interfere with the petitioner's licensed
tobacco business despite the Supreme Court's interim stay on the Telangana
tobacco prohibition notification.
- Whether
such interference violated the principles of natural justice and amounted
to arbitrary administrative action.
- Whether
the petitioner was entitled to protection under Article 226 of the
Constitution until the Supreme Court finally decided the pending
proceedings.
Petitioner's Arguments
- The
petitioner contended that he was conducting business legally under a valid
licence and GST registration while complying with all statutory tax
obligations.
- It
was argued that the Telangana Government's prohibition notification dated
07.01.2022 had already been stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in pending
Special Leave Petitions.
- Despite
the subsisting stay order, the respondents were allegedly interfering with
the petitioner's business, thereby violating the Supreme Court's
directions.
- The
petitioner submitted that such interference was arbitrary, illegal,
contrary to the principles of natural justice, and liable to be restrained
by the High Court.
Respondent's Arguments
- The
State was represented through the learned Assistant Government Pleader.
- During
the hearing, it was submitted that the controversy involved in the present
writ petition was already covered by the earlier judgment of the Telangana
High Court in W.P. No. 34806 of 2022 & Batch decided on 21.09.2022,
wherein appropriate directions had already been issued concerning
identical issues.
Court Order / Findings
The Telangana High Court observed that the present dispute
stood squarely covered by its earlier decision in W.P. No. 34806 of 2022
& Batch.
Following the earlier judgment, the Court held that:
- As
long as the interim orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C)
Nos. 1656 and 5399 of 2022 remained operative, the respondents shall not
interfere with the petitioner's lawful business activities.
- The
Court also noted that the Director General of Police had already issued a
circular to all concerned officers.
- It
was clarified that if any officer acted contrary to the said directions,
such action would be viewed seriously.
- Accordingly,
the writ petition was disposed of without costs and all pending
miscellaneous applications stood automatically closed.
Important Clarification
- A
valid licence, GST registration, and compliance with applicable tax laws
strengthen the legal protection available to a business against arbitrary
interference by authorities.
- Where
the Supreme Court has stayed the operation of a Government notification,
subordinate authorities are bound to comply with such stay.
- Administrative
authorities cannot disregard binding judicial orders while taking
enforcement action.
- The High Court reiterated that any violation of the Supreme Court's interim protection by government officials would be viewed seriously.
Sections / Provisions Involved
- Article
226 of the Constitution of India
- Section
151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
- Food
Safety and Standards Act, 2006 (relating to the impugned
notification)
- Notification
No. 501/FSS-1/2022 dated 07.01.2022
- SLP(C) Nos. 1656 of 2022 and 5399 of 2022 (Supreme Court)
Link to Download the Order
https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1785143487_2075compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment