ORDER : The petitioner/Social Democratic Party of India (‘SDPI’ for short) is before this court calling in question notification dated 28-09-2022 insofar as it pertains to entries at Sl.Nos. 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 and has consequently sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to remove seals on the schedule properties mentioned in the annexure appended to the petition on consideration of the representation of the petitioner. 2. Facts in brief that are germane are as follows:- The petitioner claims to be a political party registered under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 and has its representation all over India, more particularly, in the Dakshina Kannada District. It is the claim of the petitioner in the petition that the political party is in the forefront of empowerment of the deprived sections of the society by divisive forces through its political movement. What drives the petitioner to this court in the present petition lies in a narrow compass. On 27-09-2022 the Government of India in exercise of powers conferred on it under sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘the Act’ for short) declared Popular Front of India (‘PFI’ for short) and its associates or affiliates or Fronts including Rehab India Foundation, Campus Front of India, All India Imams Council, National Confederation of Human Rights Organization, National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation and Rehab Foundation, Kerala as unlawful associations. On 28.09.2022 Government of India directed that all the powers which are exercisable by it under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act shall be exercised by the State Governments and Union territories. It appears that Government of India later conveyed approval that the State Government and Union Territory Administrations may, by order in writing direct that any power which has been directed to be exercised by it, shall, in certain circumstances be exercised by any person subordinate to the State Government and the Union Territory. 3. Based on the aforesaid notification, several raids took place in the City of Mangalore. While so doing, certain campuses and places which were being allegedly used by several organizations were sealed and a few such offices of the petitioner/SDPI were also sealed in Mangalore. 3. Based on the aforesaid notification, several raids took place in the City of Mangalore. While so doing, certain campuses and places which were being allegedly used by several organizations were sealed and a few such offices of the petitioner/SDPI were also sealed in Mangalore. Against the said act of sealing of premises by the State Government, the petitioner submits a representation on 29-09-2022, being surprised as to why the offices run by the petitioner/SDPI is targeted. No reply comes about on the representation given by the petitioner. It is at that point in time, the petitioner knocks at the doors of this Court in the subject petition on 15-11-2022. This Court issues notice to the respondents and directs impleadment of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Union of India as party respondent to these proceedings and all the respondents have filed their respective documents or statement of objections as the case would be. At the time of hearing of the petitioner, certain documents were produced before the Court by the State Government which led the petitioner to amend the petition raising a challenge to the very notification of the Central Government delegating its powers to the State Government to act in terms of the Act. 4. Heard Sri Mohammed Tahir, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri M. Aruna Shyam, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents 1 to 3 and Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.4. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Mohammed Tahir submits that a perusal at the Notification which imposes a ban on the activities of the Popular Front of India would clearly indicates that it is restrictable only to certain entities which are depicted in the said Notification itself. SDPI was not the one of those entities which were declared to be associates of PFI. Therefore, the very act of the State Government in searching and sealing the offices of the petitioner was contrary to law. Since the notifications are produced along with the statement of objections, the learned counsel would submit that he has sought permission to amend the petition and the petition is so amended by raising a challenge to those notifications also, as those notifications confer power beyond what is permitted under the Notification of the Central Government. Since the notifications are produced along with the statement of objections, the learned counsel would submit that he has sought permission to amend the petition and the petition is so amended by raising a challenge to those notifications also, as those notifications confer power beyond what is permitted under the Notification of the Central Government. It is his submission that the State Government cannot travel beyond what is delegated to it in terms of the Notification. 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General Sri M. Aruna Shyam representing the State would vehemently refute the submissions to contend that the activities of the petitioner are directly linked to the banned organization/PFI and, therefore, steps had to be taken to seal the premises. It is his submission that there is alternative remedy depicted in the notification itself which is in tune with the Act. It is a statutory remedy available against any act of the State Government to challenge it before the District Judge as serious disputed questions of fact arise in the case at hand and the contention of the petitioner is that they do not indulge in any activity that would attract the impugned action. Therefore, he submits that the writ petition should not be entertained and be relegated to the District Judge in terms of the Act. The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Sri H. Shanthi Bhushan would be the lines of Additional Advocate General. 7. In reply to the said submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he would have availed of the alternative remedy but what he called in question is the notification of the State Government which transgresses the power beyond the notification of the Central Government. That question cannot be decided by the District Judge and therefore, the writ petition would be entertainable and submits that the illegal action be quashed and relief prayed for be granted. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 9. The aforementioned facts though not in dispute would require a little elaboration. The Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs issues a notification on 27-09-2022 banning PFI and many of its Associations or Affiliates or Fronts. 9. The aforementioned facts though not in dispute would require a little elaboration. The Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs issues a notification on 27-09-2022 banning PFI and many of its Associations or Affiliates or Fronts. The notification insofar as it is germane reads as follows : “S.O. 4559(E).- Whereas, the Popular Front of India (hereinafter referred to as the PFI) had been registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860) vide Registration No.S/226/Dist.South/2010 in Delhi and it has many associates or affiliates or fronts, including Rehab India Foundation (RIF) (Registration Number 1352, dated 17.03.2008), Campus Front of India (CFI), All India Imams Council (AIIC), National Confederation of Human Rights Organization (NCHRO) (Registration Number S-3256, dated 12.09.2010), National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation (Registration Number KCH-IV-00150/2016-17, dated 02.12.2016) and Rehab Foundation, Kerala (Registration Number 1016/91);” In terms of the notification Popular Front of India and the aforequoted organizations come to be banned. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was not the one that was sought to be linked with the PFI by the Central Government. The Notification of the Central Government did not restrict it to what is notified. It further delegated to the State Governments to act in terms of the Act and take all such measures. In furtherance of the said power conferred, several notifications have come to be issued. Pursuant to the aforesaid notification of 27-09-2022, the State Government takes several steps, one such step is locking the premises of the petitioner/organization. The notification issued by the State Government on 28-09-2022 reads as follows : “GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA No.HD/565/SST/2022 Karnataka Government Secretariat Vidhana Soudha Bengaluru, dated: 28.09.2022. NOTIFICATION Whereas, the Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by section 3(1) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (37 of 1967), has declared the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its associates or affiliates or fronts, including Rehab India Foundation (RIF), Campus Front of India (CFI); All India Imams Council (AIIC), National Confederation of Human Rights Organisation (NCHRO), National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation and Rehab Foundation, Kerala as unlawful association vide notification number S.O.4559(E), dated:27th September, 2022 with immediate effect. And whereas, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 42 of the said Act, the Central Government has directed vide Notification No.4560(E), dated: 28th September 2022 that all the States and Union Territory Administrations shall exercise the powers exercisable by the Central Government under sections 7 and section 8 of the said Act; And whereas, vide order No.14017/4/2022-NI-MFO, dated: 28th September, 2022 (copy enclosed) the approval of the Central Government under section 42 of the said Act, is conveyed that the State Government and Union Territory Administrations may, by order in writing, direct that any power which has been directed to be exercised by it, shall in such circumstances and under such conditions, as may be specified in the directions, be exercised by any person subordinate to the State Government and Union Territory Administrations; Now, therefore, the State Government hereby directs that in relation to the associations which have been declared as unlawful associations by the Central Government vide notification number S.O.4559(E), dated:27th September, 2022 all powers exercisable by the State Government under section 7 and section 8 of the said Act shall be exercised by the jurisdictional Commissioners of Police in their respective commissionerates and Deputy Commissioners cum District Magistrates within their respective districts in the State of Karnataka. By order and in the name of the Governor of Karnataka, (Rajashekhara M. G.) Under Secretary to Government Home Department (Law and Order)” (Emphasis added) The State Government in terms of the power conferred by the notification issued by the Central Government directs that in relation to Associations which have been declared unlawful by the Central Government in terms of its notification dated 27.09.2022 the power exercisable by the State Government under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act is further delegated to the jurisdictional Commissioners of Police in the respective Commissionerates and Deputy Commissioners cum District Magistrates to act in terms of the notification. Likewise another notification is issued on 28-09-2022. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 8 of the Act certain organizations coming within the jurisdiction of the commissionerate of Mangalore are banned. It concerns of several offices of the petitioner. The notification reads as follows : “Now therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 8 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention Unlawful Association Sl. No. Sub-division Police Station Place 1. It concerns of several offices of the petitioner. The notification reads as follows : “Now therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 8 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention Unlawful Association Sl. No. Sub-division Police Station Place 1. Central Sub Division, Mangalore City Mangalore North Police Station CFI Campus Centre, Azazuddin road Bunder Mangalore 2. Central Sub Division, Mangalore City Mangalore North Police Station SDPI Office, Karbala road, Kudroli, Mangalore 3. Central Sub Division, Mangalore City Mangalore South Police Station Information and Empowerment centre F-125, 2nd floor, Sahakari sadana complex, Rao and Rao circle, Mangalore 4. Central Sub Division, Mangalore City Mangalore South Police Station PFI, 1st floor, west coast complex, Nellikai road, Mangalore 5. North Sub Division, Mangalore City Panambur Police Station SDPI Office, Residence building of Siddiq, Kasababengre, Near Ferry, Mangalore 6. North Sub Division, Mangalore City Bajpe Police Station SDPI Office, Sagar complex, J.M road, Adduru, Mangalore 7. North Sub Division, Mangalore City Bajpe Police Station SDPI Office, Royal heritage, complex Kinnipadavu, Jummu Masjid road, Bajpe, Mangalore 8. North Sub Division, Mangalore City Surathkal Police Station SDPI Office, Thannirubavi, Near Mohiddin Jumma Masjid building, Ckokkabettu, Surathkal, Mangalore 9. North Sub Division, Mangalore City Surathkal Police Station SDPI Office, Near Samshudd in Circle, Katipalla 2nd block, Surathkal, Mangalore 10. South Sub Division, Mangalore City Ullal Police Station SDPI Office, Kumarangala cross, K.C. Road, Ullal Taluk 11. South Sub Division, Mangalore City Konaje Police Station SDPI Office, A site, infront of Masjid, Kakkebettu, Innoli, Pavoor Village, Ullal Taluk 12. South Sub Division, Mangalore City Mangalore Rural Police Station Rent building of Abubakar Kudroli, Badriya Nagar Junction, Malluru, Mangalore Any person aggrieved by this notification issued in respect of a place under sub-section (1) or by an order made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may, within 15 days from the date of this notification or order as the case may be, make an application to the court of the District Judge within the local limits of whose Jurisdiction such notifies places is situated. (a) For declaration that the place has not been used for the purpose of the unlawful association; or (b) For setting aside the order made under sub-section (3) or sub section (4), And on receipt of the application the court of District Judge shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, decide the question.” (Emphasis added) The notification is unequivocal. In exercise of powers conferred under Section 42 of the Act, the Central Government has directed the State Governments to pass appropriate orders under Sections 7 and 8 of the Act. Sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 8 permits aggrieved person to knock at the doors of the District Magistrate within the local limits of whose jurisdiction where such notices or the State Government has notified certain act. The issue now is whether in the teeth of the mandate of the statute the writ petition would be entertainable or otherwise. 10. Section 3 of the Act reads as follows : “3. Declaration of an association as unlawful.—(1) If the Central Government is of opinion that any association is, or has become, an unlawful association, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare such association to be unlawful. (2) Every such notification shall specify the grounds on which it is issued and such other particulars as the Central Government may consider necessary: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall require the Central Government to disclose any fact which it considers to be against the public interest to disclose. (3) No such notification shall have effect until the Tribunal has, by an order made under Section 4, confirmed the declaration made therein and the order is published in the Official Gazette: Provided that if the Central Government is of opinion that circumstances exist which render it necessary for that Government to declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect, it may, for reasons to be stated in writing, direct that the notification shall, subject to any order that may be made under Section 4, have effect from the date of its publication in the Official Gazette. (4) Every such notification shall, in addition to its publication in the Official Gazette, be published in not less than one daily newspaper having circulation in the State in which the principal office, if any, of the association affected is situated, and shall also be served on such association in such manner as the Central Government may think fit and all or any of the following modes may be followed in effecting such service, namely: (a) by affixing a copy of the notification to some conspicuous part of the office, if any, of the association; or (b) by serving a copy of the notification, where possible, on the principal office-bearers, if any, of the association; or (c) by proclaiming by beat of drum or by means of loudspeakers, the contents of the notification in the area in which the activities of the association are ordinarily carried on; or (d) in such other manner as may be prescribed.” (Emphasis added) Section 3 permits the Central Government to issue a Notification if, in its opinion any association is or has become an unlawful association on specification of certain grounds for which it is issued and other particulars if it is necessary. Section 7 deals with power to prohibit the use of funds of an unlawful association. Section 8 which forms the fulcrum of the subject lis reads as follows : “8. Power to notify places for the purpose of an unlawful association.—(1) Where an association has been declared unlawful by a notification issued under Section 3 which has become effective under sub-section (3) of that section, the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, notify any place which in its opinion is used for the purpose of such unlawful association. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, “place” includes a house or building, or part thereof, or a tent or vessel. (2) On the issue of a notification under sub-section (1), the District Magistrate within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such notified place is situate or any officer authorised by him in writing in this behalf shall make a list of all movable properties (other than wearing-apparel, cooking vessels, beds and beddings, tools of artisans, implements of husbandry, cattle, grain and foodstuffs and such other articles as he considers to be of a trivial nature) found in the notified place in the presence of two respectable witnesses. (3) If, in the opinion of the District Magistrate, any articles specified in the list are or may be used for the purpose of the unlawful association, he may make an order prohibiting any person from using the articles save in accordance with the written orders of the District Magistrate. (4) The District Magistrate may thereupon make an order that no person who at the date of the notification was not a resident in the notified place shall, without the permission of the District Magistrate, enter, or be on or in, the notified place: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any near relative of any person who was a resident in the notified place at the date of the notification. (5) Where in pursuance of sub-section (4), any person is granted permission to enter, or to be on or in, the notified place, that person shall, while acting under such permission, comply with such orders for regulating his conduct as may be given by the District Magistrate. (6) Any police officer, not below the rank of a sub-Inspector, or any other person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government may search any person entering, or seeking to enter, or being on or in, the notified place and may detain any such person for the purpose of searching him: Provided that no female shall be searched in pursuance of this sub-section except by a female. (7) If any person is in the notified place in contravention of an order made under sub-section (4), then, without prejudice to any other proceedings which may be taken against him, he may be removed therefrom by any officer or by any other person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government. (7) If any person is in the notified place in contravention of an order made under sub-section (4), then, without prejudice to any other proceedings which may be taken against him, he may be removed therefrom by any officer or by any other person authorised in this behalf by the Central Government. (8) Any person aggrieved by a notification issued in respect of a place under sub-section (1) or by an order made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may, within thirty days from the date of the notification or order, as the case may be, make an application to the Court of the District Judge within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such notified place is situate— (a) for declaration that the place has not been used for the purpose of the unlawful association; or (b) for setting aside the order made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4), and on receipt of the application the Court of the District Judge shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, decide the question.” (Emphasis supplied) Section 8 empowers the Central Government to notify places used for the purpose of unlawful association. It mandates that where an association has been declared to be unlawful by a notification under Section 3, the Central Government may by notification notify any place which in its opinion is used for the purpose of such unlawful association. Sub-section (8) thereof permits any person aggrieved by any notification issued in respect of a place under sub-section (1) or by an order made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may within 30 days from the date of notification or order as the case would be, make an application to the Court of District Judge within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such notified place is situated. Sub-section (3) mandates that if, in the opinion of the District Magistrate any articles specified in the list which may be used for the purpose of such unlawful association which is declared as one under Section 3, may make order prohibiting any person from using the articles under the written orders of the District Magistrate. Sub-section (4) is also to the same effect. The case on hand needs consideration on the aforesaid provisions of the Act. 11. It is a matter of record that under Section 3 of the Act, the PFI is declared to be a banned organization. Sub-section (4) is also to the same effect. The case on hand needs consideration on the aforesaid provisions of the Act. 11. It is a matter of record that under Section 3 of the Act, the PFI is declared to be a banned organization. The offices of the petitioner are sealed on account of them being allegedly used by the banned organization. The statement of objections of the State is to that effect. It is the contention in the statement of objections that the offices of the petitioner situated in the places where seals have been stamped were all being used by the banned organization. Therefore, it forms a seriously disputed question of fact. The notification by which the Union Government directs the State Government to act in a particular manner cannot be considered in the absence of any evidence. More so, in the light of the contention that the State Government has acted beyond the powers conferred on it would be neither here nor there as the State Government has, on certain inputs to it, imposed seals or clamped upon the offices of the petitioner along with others. Merely because all the offices in Mangalore are sealed and not anywhere else would not mean that evidence would not be required for the petitioner to prove its case in terms of Section 8 of the Act. 12. Sub-section (8) of Section 8 (supra) has provided clear remedy to a person aggrieved, as it clearly indicates any person aggrieved which need not be a person which is the subject of any notification. It reads any person; any means each and every, aggrieved by the effect of the notification issued in respect of a place under sub-section (1) or by an order made under sub-section (3) or sub-section (4) may knock at the doors of the District Judge. The purpose is also depicted in the said provision, it is for a declaration that the place is not used for the purpose of unlawful association or set aside the order made under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 8 of the Act and after giving the parties opportunity of being heard decide the question. Sub-section (8) of Section 8 is unequivocal. The powers are vast and necessarily so. Sub-section (8) of Section 8 is unequivocal. The powers are vast and necessarily so. What is necessary to be let in before the District Judge is evidence as to how the offices are sealed as the sections empower the District Judge to consider any order made under sub-section (3) or subsection (4) of Section 8 of the Act. 13. The notifications issued to seal the premises of the petitioner by the State Government are undoubtedly under the exercise of power under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section (8) of the Act. Therefore, the petitioner has an alternative remedy which is statutory and necessarily to be availed of, in the peculiar facts of this case, as recording of evidence for the acts of the State is imperative. It is trite law that mere existence of alternative remedy of appeal, writ petition cannot be said to be not maintainable or entertainable. Every writ petition before this Court would be maintainable, but many a time, many a writ petition would not be entertainable, as knocking the doors of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is invoking the extraordinary, discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, it is for the Court to exercise such discretion or not, in the given set of facts. In the teeth of the aforesaid facts which undoubtedly require evidence, I decline to entertain the petition, reserving liberty to the petitioner to urge all these contentions before the District Judge who is empowered to consider the issues under the Act itself. 14. For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following : ORDER (i) Writ Petition is rejected. (ii) The petitioner is reserved liberty to approach the District Judge in terms of sub-section (8) of Section 8 of the Act, if so advised.