Aidan Vs State of Telangana and Others (Telangana High Court)
Telangana High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Action Against Chartered Accountant Over Alleged Misappropriation and Forged GST Challans
The Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking directions to State authorities to act on allegations of misappropriation of GST funds and use of forged GST challans by a person alleged to be a Chartered Accountant.
The Court held that, on the pleadings, the petitioner had not made out a case for writ interference against a private person based on the authorities’ alleged inaction. It also observed that a dispute arising from a Memorandum of Understanding between private parties, including default of post-dated cheques, could not be made the subject matter of writ proceedings.
Introduction
In Sri Aidan vs State of Telangana and Others, the petitioner approached the Telangana High Court alleging that the authorities had failed to act on his representation dated 15.07.2026 concerning alleged professional misconduct, misappropriation of GST funds and use of forged GST challans by Respondent No.6.
The petitioner sought directions for verification of the alleged forged GST records and initiation of appropriate statutory, disciplinary and regulatory proceedings, including cancellation of the person’s licence or membership if found warranted.
Background of the Dispute
The petitioner claimed ownership and possession of land measuring 694.54 square yards at Bhoopathipoor Revenue Village, Sultanabad Mandal, Peddapalli District. According to the petition, the land had been transferred to a developer through a registered sale deed dated 05.10.2024, after payment of stamp duty, registration fees, mutation charges and other statutory amounts.
The petitioner alleged that Respondent No.6, who was stated to be holding himself out as a Chartered Accountant, had misappropriated GST funds and used forged GST challans. The petitioner also referred to a Memorandum of Understanding dated 13.02.2021, under which the parties had amicably settled the matter and Respondent No.6 had allegedly agreed to repay certain amounts through six post-dated cheques. The petitioner stated that the cheques were not honoured and that, despite a legal notice and communications to the police and GST authorities, no action had been taken.
Relief Sought
The petitioner asked the Court to declare the authorities’ alleged inaction on the representation dated 15.07.2026 illegal and arbitrary, and to direct them to verify the GST records and take appropriate statutory, disciplinary and regulatory action against Respondent No.6.
Court’s Observations
The High Court found that the pleadings did not make out a case for exercising writ jurisdiction against Respondent No.6, a private person, on the basis of the authorities’ alleged failure to act on the petitioner’s representation.
The Court further observed that the Memorandum of Understanding had been executed between two private parties and that default of a post-dated cheque could not be made the subject matter of writ proceedings. It also held that a direction to initiate action for alleged misconduct against a person alleged to be a member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India could not be issued in the exercise of writ jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case.
Final Judgment
The Telangana High Court dismissed the writ petition. No order was made as to costs, and any pending miscellaneous applications were closed.
Author’s Analysis
1. Writ Jurisdiction and Allegations Against a Private Person
The Court’s decision turned on the nature of the relief sought and the parties involved. The petitioner sought writ directions based on alleged inaction by public authorities concerning allegations against a private individual. The Court concluded that the pleadings did not justify writ interference in the circumstances presented.
2. Private Settlement and Cheque Default
The petitioner relied on a Memorandum of Understanding and alleged default of post-dated cheques. The Court stated that the agreement was between private parties and that the cheque default could not be made the subject matter of writ proceedings.
3. Alleged Professional Misconduct
The petitioner also sought action concerning alleged misconduct by a person said to be a member of the ICAI. The Court held that, in the circumstances of this case, it could not issue a writ direction to initiate such action. The order does not determine whether the allegations of misappropriation or forged GST challans were true.
Conclusion
In Sri Aidan vs State of Telangana and Others, W.P. No. 28123 of 2026, the Telangana High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking directions for action on allegations of GST-related misconduct against a private person. The Court relied on the private-party nature of the underlying settlement and the limits of writ relief in the circumstances pleaded. The dismissal did not amount to a finding on the truth or otherwise of the allegations themselves.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF TELANGANA HIGH COURT
Heard Ms. Rafeen, learned counsel appearing for Mr. Mohd. Fasiuddin, learned counsel for petitioner.
2. This Writ Petition has been preferred with the following prayer:
“…..declaring the inaction of Respondents Nos.1 to 5 in failing to act upon the Petitioner’s Representation dated 15.07.2026 against the professional misconduct, misappropriation of GST funds, and use of forged GST challans by Respondent No.6 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct Respondents Nos.1 to 5 to forthwith verify the forged GST records, initiate and complete appropriate statutory, disciplinary and regulatory proceedings against Respondent No.6 in accordance with law, including cancellation of his licence/membership, if found eligible.”
3. The petitioner claims to be the absolute owner and possessor of land admeasuring 694.54 Square Yards in Survey No.92/1/4/1/1/1 situated at Bhoopathipoor Revenue Village, Sultanabad Mandal, Peddapalli District, which was transferred to a developer by a registered sale deed dated 05.10.2024 after payment of entire stamp duty, registration fee, mutation charges and other statutory amounts. The petitioner alleges inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 5 upon the petitioner’s representation HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J 2 W.P.No.28123 of 2026 dated 15.07.2026 for taking action against respondent No.6 for misappropriation of GST funds and use of forged GST challans. Respondent No.6 is alleged to be a Chartered Accountant. The petitioner refers to the Memorandum of Understanding executed on 13.02.2021 with respondent No.6 under which the matter was amicably settled and respondent No.6 admitted his liability to repay certain amounts in six post-dated cheques which he failed to do. Even after issuing legal notice and copies thereof to the police station concerned and GST authorities, no action was taken against respondent No.6. As per the petitioner’s representation also, respondent No.6 is holding out as a Chartered Accountant. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court.
4. On the averments made in the Writ Petition, prima facie, the petitioner has not been able to make out a case for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court against a private person, respondent No.6, on the alleged inaction of respondent Nos.1 to 5 upon the petitioner’s representation for taking action against him. The aforesaid Memorandum of Understanding was executed between the two private parties and the default of any post-dated cheque cannot be made the subject matter of writ proceedings. Moreover, a direction to initiate action on alleged misconduct against a person alleged to be a member of respondent No.3, Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), cannot be issued in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this Court.
HCJ (AKrS, J) & GMM, J 3 W.P.No.28123 of 2026 Therefore, the instant Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
