Ramdhan Meena v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Benami Prohibition),Rajasthan, Jaipur, Room

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10440/2023 Ramdhan Meena S/o Sh. Rewadmal Meena, Aged About 44Years, R/o Village - Langdiyawas, Tehsil - Jamwaramgarh,District - Jaipur (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Benami Prohibition),Rajasthan, Jaipur, Room No. 335, Ncr Building, Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur, Rajasthan. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Javed KhanFor Respondent(s): Mr. Siddharth Bapna HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 19/10/2023 Heard. Taking into consideration the nature of relief sought in thewrit petition, we are not inclined to keep this petition pending. In view of the authoritative pronouncement of Hon’bleSupreme Court in the case of Union of India & Another VersusM/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2022 SC 4558, theadjudicating authority has passed the order on 29.08.2022revoking attachment of petitioner’s property. What is brought the petitioner before this Court is thatdespite the order having been passed the initiatingauthority/respondent is not sending any communication to therevenue authority regarding revocation of attachment with the result that the revenue records continue to record the propertyunder attachment. We find that the petitioner himself has taken about eightmonths to inform this fact to the respondent. However, once anorder of revocation has been passed, the adjudicating authoritywas obliged under the law to send official communication to therevenue authority regarding revocation. However, now the respondent should positively send acommunication to the concerned revenue authority within a periodof six weeks from today. The petitioner may directly approach the revenue authorityon the basis of order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the adjudicatingauthority for carrying out necessary correction removing theattachment flag from the revenue entries pertaining to the land ofthe petitioner. In case petitioner approaches revenue authority,the revenue authority shall do well to carry out necessarycorrection within a period of six weeks. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of. We place on record the submission of learned counsel for therespondent that the review petition has been filed before theHon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of order passed in the caseof Union of India & Another Versus M/S. Ganpati Dealcom Pvt.Ltd., which is pending consideration. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J 27- Mohit Kumar