Mohammed Abdul Umair vs. The State Of Telangana

Facts

The petitioners, Mohammed Abdul Umair, Shaik Imtiyaz Ahmed, and Suresh Kumar Bansal, are engaged in the business of selling tobacco products under valid licenses, paying GST and other taxes, and operating with valid waybills. They filed writ petitions seeking to restrain the respondents (State of Telangana and police authorities) from interfering with their lawful business activities. The interference by the respondents occurred despite a prohibition notification on tobacco issued by the respondent on January 7, 2022, and a subsequent interim stay granted by the Supreme Court on this notification. The petitioners argued that the respondents' actions were arbitrary and illegal, violating natural justice principles, especially in light of the Supreme Court's stay.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petitions by directing the respondents not to interfere with the business activities of the petitioners until the orders passed by the Honourable Apex Court in SLP(C) Nos. 1656 and 5399 of 2022 are in operation. The Court noted that the Director General of Police had also issued a circular to all concerned. The Court further stated that if any action is initiated by any officer contrary to this direction, it shall be viewed seriously. The common order dated September 21, 2022, in W.P.No.34806 of 2022 and batch was to be annexed to this order. The Court did not decide any specific issue regarding the legality of the prohibition notification itself, but rather focused on enforcing the Supreme Court's interim stay and preventing interference with lawful business activities during its operation. The ratio decidendi is that police authorities must respect interim stays granted by the Supreme Court and High Court regarding business operations and should not interfere with lawful trade in tobacco products as long as such stays are in effect.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondents' continuous interference with the petitioners' lawful business activities, including the sale of tobacco products, is arbitrary and illegal, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's interim stay on the prohibition notification dated January 7, 2022? (Question of law and fact, concerning Article 226 of the Constitution of India and principles of natural justice). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners contended that their business is lawful, covered by valid licenses, waybills, and payment of GST and all taxes. They argued that the respondents' interference is arbitrary and illegal, violating the principles of natural justice. They relied on the Supreme Court's interim stay on the prohibition notification dated January 7, 2022, and a previous order of the High Court in WP.No.5444/2021, SLP(C)1656/2022, SLP(C)5399/2022, and WP(C)1951/2022 dated March 31, 2022. Revenue/State's Arguments: The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home did not dispute the petitioners' submission that the subject matter is covered by a previous common order of the High Court.