132521 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOUFITIBLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO:19717 OF 2026 Between Shaik Quayyum, S/o. Shaik Ahmed, Aged 49 years, Occ. Driver, R/o. H.No. 9-18-132, Malapally, Nizamabad Town and District. Pincode. 503001. PETITIONER D 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nizamabad District. 3 The District Civil Supply Officer, Nizamabad District. 4 The Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies) Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 5 The Station House Officer, Nizamabad Vl TN, Nizamabad District. fif+T{Il\rtllilfE Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicle of the petitioner DOST, bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, on the ground of carrying PDS rice by the Accused in Cr.No. 11812026, as highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent 5 to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner. 1

Petition under 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 direct the respondent Sth to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner DOST, bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. GAJE RAGHU Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: SRI NAGARAJU GALI, AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent Nos.45: AGP FOR HOME The Gourt rnade the following: ORDEFI IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.19717 OF 2026 DATE: 24.06.2026 Between : Shaik Quayyum Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, (Civil Supplies) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others Respondents ORDER Heard Sri. G. Raghu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Nagaraju Gali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, appearing on behalfof respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2 Tha naliliarrar - rtrt?.tr- h d thie farrri eaalziner f h Draver as under: "...to issue a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicle of the petitioner DOST, --It-t 2 w.P. No.19717 or 2-s#;

bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, on the ground of carrying PDS rice by the Accused in Cr.No. tla/2126, as highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.5 to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner and pass..." on3. It is represented by the learned counsel appearing behalf of the petitioner that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 27.02.2025 passed in W.P. No. 5819 of 2025. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 5. In view of the above Facts and circumstances, taking into consideration the fact that the respondent authorities have initiated proceedings under Section 6-4 of the E.C. Act and the same are pending, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.5 to release the vehicle i.e., DOST bearing Registration No.rS16UC2953 seized on 07.OS.2026 in connection with Crime No.118 of 2026 of Nizamabad VI town ==a=E -: --rl 3 SN,J W.P. No.19717 of 2026

Police Station Nizamabad District, in favour of the petitioner subject to condition of petitioner furnishing bank guarantee by way of Fixed Deposit for a sum of Rs'25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) in favour of respondent No'5' Release of confiscation the vehicle shall be subject to outcome of the proceedings under Section 6-4 of the E.C. Act. Pending such proceedings, the petitioner is directed not to alienate or alter physical features of the subject vehicle, and is further directed to produce the vehicle as and when required by the authorities concerned. No order as to costs. pending in this Writ Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, Petition, shall stand closed. SD/- A.H,S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASS]STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// G SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) Department' Secretariat' T.S.,Hyderabad. District' : 2. The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nlzamabad g.tt,"oi.t,i.tCivilSupplyofficer,NizamabadDistrict. +. fn" O"puty TansiUai lbivil Supplies) tlizqlg!9U' Nizamabad District' S.fneStationHouseOfficer,NizamabadVlTN,NizamabadDistrict' [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRl. GAJE RAGHU Advocate to cp FoR CtVtL SUppLtES High court for the state of relangana, ;. i;; cc" at Hyderabad [OUT]'cp FoR HOME High court for the state of Telangana, at to a. iwo'bcs Hyderabad [OUT] 9. Two CD CoPies (Along with copy of the order dated 27 .02.2025 in WRIT PETITION No' 5819 of 2025) BM TKS can v, CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED: 2410612026 ORDER

WP.No.19717 of 2026 yrE ii-ra f4r 1 t tt 'tr 0 6 JUL 2026 c io() * * D Es A't c DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS q(9 ,,2, r T. MADHAVI DEVI THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE 1 ORDER: ThisWritPetitionisfiledtocleclaretheactionof therespondentsinseizingtlr.epetitioners,vehiclesi.e., Lorries bearing Nos' TS 04: UA 8799 and TS 02 UD 4574 in connection with Crime No'30 of 2025 of on 14.02 -2A25 District' (Touon) Police Station' Ramagundam Chennur i' an)' enqLrrry, as il1ega1, arbitrary aird without conducting unconstitutional. t for ttre petitioners and 2. Heard learned counsel for civil supplies appearing learned Government Pieader and learned respondents No' 1 to 6 on behalf of for Home appearing on behalf of Government Pleader respondent No.7. Perused the material on record' i'e'' Lorries bearing The vehicies of the petitioners 3. Nos. TS 04 UA 8799 and TS 02 UD 4574 were seized on in connection with Crime W.A2.2O25 by the respondents (Town) Police Station' 2Cl25 of Chennur No.30 of ri ,.:,$&. . 2 Ramagundam District, under Section 318(2) read with section 3{5) of Bharatiya Nyaya sanhita, 2023 and section Act, 1955 (for short the7 of the !lss,:n:ial coramcdities E.C. Ac:t").

for Civil Supplii:s4. I.,rjal-n'lo' Governnient Pleader under section 6-A of the B.c-submitted theit proceed,ings Act, have been initiated against the petitioners and the sarne are penciing. I.earned Government Pleader further submitted ihat the subject vehicles are sliil in the custod5r of responclent No.7-Police Station' t abor,.e facts and circumstances,5. In vieri, of the respondenttaking intc c,:nsicleration the fact that the authoriries have initiated proceedings under SecLion 6-A of the E.C. Act and the same a-re pending, this Court is inclined tc grant relief to the petitioners' Petition is disposed of6. Acccrdingly, this writ release the vehicles i'e', directing resnondent No.7 to Lorries bearing Nos. TS 04 UA 8799 and TS 02 uD 4574, seized on I4.o2.2A25 in connection with crime No.30 0f 3 2o2lofChennur(Town)PoliceStation,Ramagundam District, in favour of the petitioners subject to'condition of their furnishing bank guarantee by way of Fixed Deposit (Rupees Twenty Five Thousandfor a sum of Rs.25,000/-No'2' Release of theonly) each ir: favour of respond'ent vehicles sha1l be subject to outcome of the confi'scation 6-A of the E'C' Act' Pendingproceed.ings under Section to the petitioners are directed "o.tsuch proceedings, alienateoralterphysicalfeaturesofthesubjectu"hicl",, as a:rdand are further directed to produce the vehicles € whenrequiredbytheauthoritiescorrcerned.Noorderas to costs.

in this if any' pending Miscellaneous applications' writ petition, shall stand closed' .enr-[) .ErAr}lf,A TTAEIIJA ETENNV IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLIAIANDA Between : Gugloth Jabbal Lat Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Forest Department, Hyderabad & 4 others Respondents ORDER: Heard Sri K. Anantha Rao, learned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and learn Assistant Government Pleader for Forest appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to S. 2. The oetitioner a Era this Court ki no the "...to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing a confiscation order of the tractor of the petitioner bearrng No.TS 17 T 2472 of MF 95OO Tractor and not releasing the same as illegal and consequenfly direct the respondent No.5 to see that the land had been given as podu patta to the said Bhukya Sunitha and therefore no offence is made out against the \* -/ 2 SN,J wP 5809 2026

petitioner herein and hence set aside the impugned orddr confi:;cating of the vehicle and pass such other order ..." petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner3, The case of the had purchased an MF 9500 tractor bearing No. TS 17 T 7472 in the year 2020 under the Prime 14inister Self-Employment Scheme itnd has been earning livelihood by providing hire services. On 22.03.2021, the Forest Range Officer summoned the petitioner along with petitioner's tractor and seized the same, alleging that it had been used for ploughing Iand in Sy.No.38Il of Ankireddypally Thanda belonging to Smt. Bhukya Sunitha and that it was involved in a forest offence. Subsequently, confiscation proceedings were initiated under Sections 44(2-8) aad 44(2-C) of the Telangana Forest Act, culminating in an order dated 04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle without aFfording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Earlier, in W.P. No.24318 of 202L, this Hon'ble Court vehicle subject to deposit ofdirected release of the Rs.2,00,0C0/-, which the petitioner was unable to comply with due to financial hardship. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to set aside the confiscation order and for interim release of the vehicle. 4, 3 aJ SN;J wP_5809_2026 a th . 4. Order:

For all the reasons mentioned above, and as per the powers vested to me under section 44 (2) oF T.s. Forest Act, L967, I hereby order for confiscation of the vehicres Tractor bearing Nos. TS,7T747Z, TS17T3596, TSL7C7196 and TS17T3494 Fitted with front brade and rear prough arong with the forest produce i.8., 25 cariloads of firewood varue @ Rs.622/- per cart road, totar destruction varue of Rs.15550/- to the Government as it was invorved in commission of forest offence i.e., Trespass into Reserve Forest, Atternpt of Encroachment in R.F. tand to an extent of 3.g9 Ha and 5.636 Ha for curtivaEion purpose by way of proughing of R.F rand, uprooted and removed the Forest produce 25 cart roads fire wood value @ 622/- per cart load value of Rs.15550/_ and damaged 500 No's of staggered Trenches of value Rs.1,50,000/- Total Value of destruction is Rs.1,65,550/_. An appear against this order ries before the chief conservator of Forests, Nizamabad circre, Nizamabad / District court, Nizamabad within (30) days from the date of receipt of this order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of section 44 of r.s. Forest Act, L967." 4 wP_5809_2026

*9. I the petitioner herein bega to submit tha.t the 4s respondent had initiated proceedings for confiscation of the vehicle under Section 44(2-8) & 44(2-C) ofthe Telangana Forest Act and without following any principles of natural justice and the procedure laid down under the sections and without giving arry opportunity to defend the petitioner the proceedings weie concluded in passing of the order of the proceedings bearing No.1016-1/2021/56 dt.04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner tractor by saying in the order that the petitioner had accepted their guilt of entering into the forest area. The said order though said to have been made in the year 2022 the same was not communicated to the petitioner who remained innocent as to what is the proceedihg against him. The said confiscation order was passed with a clause that the petitioner could prefer ar appeal against the same within 30 days. The order was not brought to the knowledge of the petitioner and was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and everything had been done behind his back in total violation of the rules.,, n 5 (i) The order impugned dated 04.0g.2022 is illegal since it has heen passed behind the back of the petitioner without notice (ii) The petitioner had no knowledge about the passing of the impugned order dated 04.08.2022 by the 4th repsondent confiscaling petitioner's Tractor bearing No. TSUT7472. t) ) SN,J wP_5809_2026

(iii) The confiscation order is contrary to the procedure u nder the statute. i: established Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition. 6 submissions: (i) The order impugned dated 04.08.2022 is legat and as per law. (ii) Though the order impugned dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, clearly indicates that an appeal against this order lies before the Chief District Conservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad / Court, Nizamabad, within (30) days from the date of receipt oF the said order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of Section 44 of T.S. Forest Act, 1967, yet the petitioner failed to avail the remedy of preferring an appeal. Therefore, the petitioner is not entit{ed for any relief as j prayed for in the present writ petition. .9. 7. A bare perusal of the averments made at para of the I affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ 6 i809 petition clearly indicates that a specific plea is taken by the petitioner herein that the order impugned dated 04.08.2022 passed in the year 2022 had not been cimmunicated to the petitiorrer and the petitioner had been unaware of the proceeriings issued against the petitioner. Further the petitioner was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and th;lt the proceedings were conducted in violation of the statutory procedure and rules.

8. The learned Assistant Government pleader contends that the writ petitaon coutd be disposed of by directing the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal as indicated, in the impugned order dated O4.O8.2O22, of the procee<lings of the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, pertaining to the confiscation of the vehicles bearang Nos. TSLTTZ 472, TS1 7T3596, TSLT C7 tgland TS1 9. The learned counsel appearing on behatf of the petitioner does not dispute the:said submissions made by the learned Assistant Government pteader for Forests appearing on behalf of the respondents. 7 SN,J wP_s809,2026 10. Thas Court takes note of the fact that the order of 1 confiscataon proceedings of the vehictet bearing Nos. i T5L7T7472, T517T3596, TSL7C7L96 and TS17T3494 are dated O4.O8.2O22 and therefore the relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition cannot be granted at this stage. However, duty consaderlng thd, averments made at para '9' of the affidavit filed by the petitioner (referred to and extracted above), this Court opines that petitioner should be given an opportunity to avail the statutory remedy of appeal.

Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case and upon consent of both the learned counsel on record, the present writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeat against the orde-r impugned dated O4.O8.ZO2Z of the Forest Divisional I OfficAr, Kamareddy passed under Section 44 (2) of T.S. Forest Act, 1967 pertaining to order of confiscation of the vehicles bearing Nos. TS17T7422, TSLZT3S96, TS1ZC7196 and TS17T3494, within two (OZ) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and upon the petitioner preferring the said appeal before the Chief Gonservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad, appellate 8 authority shatl consider the said appeal, in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders in conformity with the, a justice by providing an opportunity ofprinciples of natural intopersonal hearing to the petitioner duly taking open to theconsideration the retevant rules. It is also petitioner to fifle an app[ication seeking immed,'iate release of the vehictes and the appellate Authority is directed to consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders, in accordance to !aw, expeditiously, pending final adjudicatlon arrd disposal of the appeal on rnerits by the 2nd respondent in accordance to law. is With these observations, the writ petition disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs. Writ 14iscellaneous petitions, if ooY, pending in this I Petition, shall stand closed. I

132521 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOUFITIBLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION NO:19717 OF 2026 Between Shaik Quayyum, S/o. Shaik Ahmed, Aged 49 years, Occ. Driver, R/o. H.No. 9-18-132, Malapally, Nizamabad Town and District. Pincode. 503001. PETITIONER D 1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nizamabad District. 3 The District Civil Supply Officer, Nizamabad District. 4 The Deputy Tahsildar (Civil Supplies) Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 5 The Station House Officer, Nizamabad Vl TN, Nizamabad District. fif+T{Il\rtllilfE Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicle of the petitioner DOST, bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, on the ground of carrying PDS rice by the Accused in Cr.No. 11812026, as highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent 5 to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner. 1

Petition under 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 direct the respondent Sth to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner DOST, bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. GAJE RAGHU Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: SRI NAGARAJU GALI, AGP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES Counsel for the Respondent Nos.45: AGP FOR HOME The Gourt rnade the following: ORDEFI IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA WRIT PETITION No.19717 OF 2026 DATE: 24.06.2026 Between : Shaik Quayyum Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, (Civil Supplies) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & 4 others Respondents ORDER Heard Sri. G. Raghu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Nagaraju Gali, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, appearing on behalfof respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2 Tha naliliarrar - rtrt?.tr- h d thie farrri eaalziner f h Draver as under: "...to issue a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicle of the petitioner DOST, --It-t 2 w.P. No.19717 or 2-s#;

bearing Registration No. TS16UC2953, on the ground of carrying PDS rice by the Accused in Cr.No. tla/2126, as highly illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent No.5 to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner and pass..." on3. It is represented by the learned counsel appearing behalf of the petitioner that the subject issue in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order of this Court dated 27.02.2025 passed in W.P. No. 5819 of 2025. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Civil Supplies, appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 does not dispute the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. 5. In view of the above Facts and circumstances, taking into consideration the fact that the respondent authorities have initiated proceedings under Section 6-4 of the E.C. Act and the same are pending, this Court is inclined to grant relief to the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.5 to release the vehicle i.e., DOST bearing Registration No.rS16UC2953 seized on 07.OS.2026 in connection with Crime No.118 of 2026 of Nizamabad VI town ==a=E -: --rl 3 SN,J W.P. No.19717 of 2026

Police Station Nizamabad District, in favour of the petitioner subject to condition of petitioner furnishing bank guarantee by way of Fixed Deposit for a sum of Rs'25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) in favour of respondent No'5' Release of confiscation the vehicle shall be subject to outcome of the proceedings under Section 6-4 of the E.C. Act. Pending such proceedings, the petitioner is directed not to alienate or alter physical features of the subject vehicle, and is further directed to produce the vehicle as and when required by the authorities concerned. No order as to costs. pending in this Writ Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, Petition, shall stand closed. SD/- A.H,S.GOWRI SHANKAR ASS]STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// G SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary (Civil Supplies) Department' Secretariat' T.S.,Hyderabad. District' : 2. The District Collector (Civil Supplies), Nlzamabad g.tt,"oi.t,i.tCivilSupplyofficer,NizamabadDistrict. +. fn" O"puty TansiUai lbivil Supplies) tlizqlg!9U' Nizamabad District' S.fneStationHouseOfficer,NizamabadVlTN,NizamabadDistrict' [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRl. GAJE RAGHU Advocate to cp FoR CtVtL SUppLtES High court for the state of relangana, ;. i;; cc" at Hyderabad [OUT]'cp FoR HOME High court for the state of Telangana, at to a. iwo'bcs Hyderabad [OUT] 9. Two CD CoPies (Along with copy of the order dated 27 .02.2025 in WRIT PETITION No' 5819 of 2025) BM TKS can v, CC TODAY HIGH COURT DATED: 2410612026 ORDER

WP.No.19717 of 2026 yrE ii-ra f4r 1 t tt 'tr 0 6 JUL 2026 c io() * * D Es A't c DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS q(9 ,,2, r T. MADHAVI DEVI THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE 1 ORDER: ThisWritPetitionisfiledtocleclaretheactionof therespondentsinseizingtlr.epetitioners,vehiclesi.e., Lorries bearing Nos' TS 04: UA 8799 and TS 02 UD 4574 in connection with Crime No'30 of 2025 of on 14.02 -2A25 District' (Touon) Police Station' Ramagundam Chennur i' an)' enqLrrry, as il1ega1, arbitrary aird without conducting unconstitutional. t for ttre petitioners and 2. Heard learned counsel for civil supplies appearing learned Government Pieader and learned respondents No' 1 to 6 on behalf of for Home appearing on behalf of Government Pleader respondent No.7. Perused the material on record' i'e'' Lorries bearing The vehicies of the petitioners 3. Nos. TS 04 UA 8799 and TS 02 UD 4574 were seized on in connection with Crime W.A2.2O25 by the respondents (Town) Police Station' 2Cl25 of Chennur No.30 of ri ,.:,$&. . 2 Ramagundam District, under Section 318(2) read with section 3{5) of Bharatiya Nyaya sanhita, 2023 and section Act, 1955 (for short the7 of the !lss,:n:ial coramcdities E.C. Ac:t").

for Civil Supplii:s4. I.,rjal-n'lo' Governnient Pleader under section 6-A of the B.c-submitted theit proceed,ings Act, have been initiated against the petitioners and the sarne are penciing. I.earned Government Pleader further submitted ihat the subject vehicles are sliil in the custod5r of responclent No.7-Police Station' t abor,.e facts and circumstances,5. In vieri, of the respondenttaking intc c,:nsicleration the fact that the authoriries have initiated proceedings under SecLion 6-A of the E.C. Act and the same a-re pending, this Court is inclined tc grant relief to the petitioners' Petition is disposed of6. Acccrdingly, this writ release the vehicles i'e', directing resnondent No.7 to Lorries bearing Nos. TS 04 UA 8799 and TS 02 uD 4574, seized on I4.o2.2A25 in connection with crime No.30 0f 3 2o2lofChennur(Town)PoliceStation,Ramagundam District, in favour of the petitioners subject to'condition of their furnishing bank guarantee by way of Fixed Deposit (Rupees Twenty Five Thousandfor a sum of Rs.25,000/-No'2' Release of theonly) each ir: favour of respond'ent vehicles sha1l be subject to outcome of the confi'scation 6-A of the E'C' Act' Pendingproceed.ings under Section to the petitioners are directed "o.tsuch proceedings, alienateoralterphysicalfeaturesofthesubjectu"hicl",, as a:rdand are further directed to produce the vehicles € whenrequiredbytheauthoritiescorrcerned.Noorderas to costs.

in this if any' pending Miscellaneous applications' writ petition, shall stand closed' .enr-[) .ErAr}lf,A TTAEIIJA ETENNV IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUREPALLIAIANDA Between : Gugloth Jabbal Lat Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Forest Department, Hyderabad & 4 others Respondents ORDER: Heard Sri K. Anantha Rao, learned counset appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and learn Assistant Government Pleader for Forest appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to S. 2. The oetitioner a Era this Court ki no the "...to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 4th respondent in passing a confiscation order of the tractor of the petitioner bearrng No.TS 17 T 2472 of MF 95OO Tractor and not releasing the same as illegal and consequenfly direct the respondent No.5 to see that the land had been given as podu patta to the said Bhukya Sunitha and therefore no offence is made out against the \* -/ 2 SN,J wP 5809 2026

petitioner herein and hence set aside the impugned orddr confi:;cating of the vehicle and pass such other order ..." petitioner, in brief, is that the petitioner3, The case of the had purchased an MF 9500 tractor bearing No. TS 17 T 7472 in the year 2020 under the Prime 14inister Self-Employment Scheme itnd has been earning livelihood by providing hire services. On 22.03.2021, the Forest Range Officer summoned the petitioner along with petitioner's tractor and seized the same, alleging that it had been used for ploughing Iand in Sy.No.38Il of Ankireddypally Thanda belonging to Smt. Bhukya Sunitha and that it was involved in a forest offence. Subsequently, confiscation proceedings were initiated under Sections 44(2-8) aad 44(2-C) of the Telangana Forest Act, culminating in an order dated 04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle without aFfording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Earlier, in W.P. No.24318 of 202L, this Hon'ble Court vehicle subject to deposit ofdirected release of the Rs.2,00,0C0/-, which the petitioner was unable to comply with due to financial hardship. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking to set aside the confiscation order and for interim release of the vehicle. 4, 3 aJ SN;J wP_5809_2026 a th . 4. Order:

For all the reasons mentioned above, and as per the powers vested to me under section 44 (2) oF T.s. Forest Act, L967, I hereby order for confiscation of the vehicres Tractor bearing Nos. TS,7T747Z, TS17T3596, TSL7C7196 and TS17T3494 Fitted with front brade and rear prough arong with the forest produce i.8., 25 cariloads of firewood varue @ Rs.622/- per cart road, totar destruction varue of Rs.15550/- to the Government as it was invorved in commission of forest offence i.e., Trespass into Reserve Forest, Atternpt of Encroachment in R.F. tand to an extent of 3.g9 Ha and 5.636 Ha for curtivaEion purpose by way of proughing of R.F rand, uprooted and removed the Forest produce 25 cart roads fire wood value @ 622/- per cart load value of Rs.15550/_ and damaged 500 No's of staggered Trenches of value Rs.1,50,000/- Total Value of destruction is Rs.1,65,550/_. An appear against this order ries before the chief conservator of Forests, Nizamabad circre, Nizamabad / District court, Nizamabad within (30) days from the date of receipt of this order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of section 44 of r.s. Forest Act, L967." 4 wP_5809_2026

*9. I the petitioner herein bega to submit tha.t the 4s respondent had initiated proceedings for confiscation of the vehicle under Section 44(2-8) & 44(2-C) ofthe Telangana Forest Act and without following any principles of natural justice and the procedure laid down under the sections and without giving arry opportunity to defend the petitioner the proceedings weie concluded in passing of the order of the proceedings bearing No.1016-1/2021/56 dt.04.08.2022 confiscating the vehicle of the petitioner tractor by saying in the order that the petitioner had accepted their guilt of entering into the forest area. The said order though said to have been made in the year 2022 the same was not communicated to the petitioner who remained innocent as to what is the proceedihg against him. The said confiscation order was passed with a clause that the petitioner could prefer ar appeal against the same within 30 days. The order was not brought to the knowledge of the petitioner and was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and everything had been done behind his back in total violation of the rules.,, n 5 (i) The order impugned dated 04.0g.2022 is illegal since it has heen passed behind the back of the petitioner without notice (ii) The petitioner had no knowledge about the passing of the impugned order dated 04.08.2022 by the 4th repsondent confiscaling petitioner's Tractor bearing No. TSUT7472. t) ) SN,J wP_5809_2026

(iii) The confiscation order is contrary to the procedure u nder the statute. i: established Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the relief as prayed for in the present writ petition. 6 submissions: (i) The order impugned dated 04.08.2022 is legat and as per law. (ii) Though the order impugned dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, clearly indicates that an appeal against this order lies before the Chief District Conservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad / Court, Nizamabad, within (30) days from the date of receipt oF the said order as per sub-section (2-D & 2-E) of Section 44 of T.S. Forest Act, 1967, yet the petitioner failed to avail the remedy of preferring an appeal. Therefore, the petitioner is not entit{ed for any relief as j prayed for in the present writ petition. .9. 7. A bare perusal of the averments made at para of the I affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the present writ 6 i809 petition clearly indicates that a specific plea is taken by the petitioner herein that the order impugned dated 04.08.2022 passed in the year 2022 had not been cimmunicated to the petitiorrer and the petitioner had been unaware of the proceeriings issued against the petitioner. Further the petitioner was not given an opportunity to defend himself in the enquiry and th;lt the proceedings were conducted in violation of the statutory procedure and rules.

8. The learned Assistant Government pleader contends that the writ petitaon coutd be disposed of by directing the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal as indicated, in the impugned order dated O4.O8.2O22, of the procee<lings of the Forest Divisional Officer, Kamareddy, pertaining to the confiscation of the vehicles bearang Nos. TSLTTZ 472, TS1 7T3596, TSLT C7 tgland TS1 9. The learned counsel appearing on behatf of the petitioner does not dispute the:said submissions made by the learned Assistant Government pteader for Forests appearing on behalf of the respondents. 7 SN,J wP_s809,2026 10. Thas Court takes note of the fact that the order of 1 confiscataon proceedings of the vehictet bearing Nos. i T5L7T7472, T517T3596, TSL7C7L96 and TS17T3494 are dated O4.O8.2O22 and therefore the relief as sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition cannot be granted at this stage. However, duty consaderlng thd, averments made at para '9' of the affidavit filed by the petitioner (referred to and extracted above), this Court opines that petitioner should be given an opportunity to avail the statutory remedy of appeal.

Accordingly, without going into the merits of the case and upon consent of both the learned counsel on record, the present writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to prefer an appeat against the orde-r impugned dated O4.O8.ZO2Z of the Forest Divisional I OfficAr, Kamareddy passed under Section 44 (2) of T.S. Forest Act, 1967 pertaining to order of confiscation of the vehicles bearing Nos. TS17T7422, TSLZT3S96, TS1ZC7196 and TS17T3494, within two (OZ) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order and upon the petitioner preferring the said appeal before the Chief Gonservator of Forests, Nizamabad Circle, Nizamabad, appellate 8 authority shatl consider the said appeal, in accordance to law and pass appropriate orders in conformity with the, a justice by providing an opportunity ofprinciples of natural intopersonal hearing to the petitioner duly taking open to theconsideration the retevant rules. It is also petitioner to fifle an app[ication seeking immed,'iate release of the vehictes and the appellate Authority is directed to consider the same on merits and pass appropriate orders, in accordance to !aw, expeditiously, pending final adjudicatlon arrd disposal of the appeal on rnerits by the 2nd respondent in accordance to law. is With these observations, the writ petition disposed off. There shall be no order as to costs. Writ 14iscellaneous petitions, if ooY, pending in this I Petition, shall stand closed. I