Akhilesh Chandra Sharma, J.

1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned show cause notice dated 02.02.2017 as well as order dated 16.5.2017 passed by Respondent no. 2/Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Amroha under Section 3 of the U.P. Control of Goodas Act, 1970 (for short the 'Act').

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned show-cause notice has been issued against the petitioner only on the ground of his involvement in a solitary case. He further submits that petitioner is neither a Gang Leader nor any Gang Member of any Gang and he has been falsely implicated in the Case Crime No. 108 of 2014 under Section 307, 147, 323, 324 I.P.C., P.S. Rajabpur, district Amroha. Relying upon on a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vijay Narayan Singh vs. State of Bihar & others, 1984(3) SCC 14, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since there is only one offence against the petitioner and that too, arises from a family dispute, the impugned show cause notice as well as consequent order passed by the respondent no. 2 is not sustainable.

4. It has been next submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned show-cause notice has been issued against the petitioner only on the ground of his involvement in a solitary case. He further submitted that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Imran alias Abdul Qudus Khan Versus State of U.P. and others reported in 2000 (Suppl.) ACC 171 (HC) has taken the view that for a person to be a "Goonda" under sub-clause (i) (b) is to be a person who has to his credit repeated / persistent overt acts not isolated and individual act and in view of the above, the impugned show-cause notice as well as consequent order passed by the respondent no.2 is liable to be quashed.

5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submitted that against the impugned order, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 6 of the Act before the Commissioner of the Division. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the petitioner has failed to make out any case for quashing the impugned show-cause notice and order at this stage as he can raise all the grounds taken by him in this writ petition in his appeal before the Commissioner of the Division, therefore this petition is premature and does not lie at this stage.

6. We have considered the argument advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Section 2(b) of the Act defines 'Goonda' which reads as under :

(b) 'Goonda' means a person who -

(i) either by himself or as a member or leader of a gang, habitually commits or attempts to commit, or abets the commission of an offence punishable under Section 153 or Section 153-B or Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code or Chapter XV, Chapter XVI, Chapter XVII or Chapter XXII of the said Code; or

(ii) has been convicted not less than thrice for an offence punishable under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956; or

(iii) has been convicted not less than thrice for an offence punishable under the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 or the Public Gambling Act, 1867 or Section 25, Section 27 or Section 29 of the Arms Act, 1959; or

(iv) is generally reputed to be a person who is desperate and dangerous to the community; or

(v) has been habitually passing indecent remarks or teasing women or girls; or

(vi) is a tout;

Explanation - 'Tout' means a person who-

(a) accepts or obtains, or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain from any person for himself or for any other person, any gratification whatever as a motive or reward for inducing, by corrupt or illegal means any public servant or member of Government, Parliament or of State Legislature, to do or forbear to do anything or to show favour or disfavour to any person or to render or attempt to render any service or disservice to any person, with the Central or State Gover