Telangana High Court
WP/24566/2004 of G. Srinivasa Rao S/o Kutumba Rao Vs The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, on 29 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 24566 of 2004 Between: G. Srinivasa Rao S/o Kutumba Rao R/o 10-5-2/1/2, Masab Tank,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANUWRIT PETITION NO : 24566 of 2004
Between:
G. Srinivasa Rao S/o Kutumba Rao R/o 10-5-2/1/2, Masab Tank, Hyderabad
AND
..... PETITIONER
1 The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, West Zone, Hyderabad2 Asst. Motor Vehicle Inspector, Enforcement O/o DTC., Kakinada EastGodavari District
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleasedto issue any Writ or order, direction more particularly one in the nature of Writof Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in seizing anddetaining the petitioner's Vehicle bearing Registration No. AP 13W 5739 videVehicle Check Report No. 1843799, dt 01-11-2004 as illegal arbitrary andunconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehiclebearing No. AP 13 W 5739 to the petitioner herein and to pass such other orderorders Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.CHANDRA SHEKHAR
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court at the admission stage, made the following:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU
WRIT PETITION NO : 24566 of 2004
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to therespondents to release his Vehicle bearing Regd.No.AP 13 W 5739.
2 . The 2[n d ]respondent seized the petitioner’s vehicle under check reportbearing No.1843799, dated 01-11-2004 for violation of certain irregularities andseized the vehicle.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner madea representation, dated 02-11-2004 and again sent an application on 22-12-2004to the 1[st] respondent requesting him to release the vehicle, but the 1[st]respondent refused to release the vehicle. Therefore, he prays to grant interimcustody of the vehicle to the petitioner. The counsel has further contended thatif any violations are made, the petitioner will be liable to pay the amount.
4. The learned Government Pleader for Transport has opposed the application filed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has to approach the 1[st]respondent-Regional Transport authority for grant of interim custody of thevehicle and appropriate orders have to be passed by the 1[st] respondent, but thepetitioner, without approaching the 1[st] respondent, has filed this writ petition.
5. As per the check report, dated 01.11.2004, the 2[nd] respondent seized thevehicle of the petitioner for violation of certain irregularities. Though it isasserted in the affidavit that the petitioner made representations dated 02-11-2004 and 22.12.2004 respectively, the 1[st] respondent has not taken any stepsfor grant of interim custody of the vehicle since the vehicle is being used for thepurpose of carrying goods. Therefore, it would be appropriate to direct theinterim custody of the vehicle to the petitioner.
6. In the light of the above circumstances, the 1[st] respondent-Deputy TransportCommissioner is directed to release the vehicle of the petitioner for interimcustody on condition that the petitioner deposits Rs.7,500/- (Rupees SevenThousand Five Hundred Only) on the following terms and conditions:
1. That the petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle to any other personwithout the permission of the 1[st] respondent.without the permission of the 1[st] respondent.
2. That the petitioner shall not change the engine or any part of thevehicle.vehicle.
3. That the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required bythe authorities concerned.the authorities concerned.
4. That the petitioner shall participate in the enquiry that is going to beconducted by the 1[st] respondent after receipt of show cause noticeby filing his explanation.conducted by the 1[st] respondent after receipt of show cause noticeby filing his explanation.
5. That the tax, if any, may be adjusted out of the amount deposited bythe petitioner.the petitioner.
The 2[nd] respondent may take further steps for recovery of the tax from thepetitioner.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the above directions.There shall be no order as to costs.There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________
December 29, 2004
Note:
Furnish C.C. by tomorrow.
B/o.
Kvr
To
1. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, West Zone, Hyderabad 2 The Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector,Enforcement O/o DTC.,Enforcement O/o DTC., Kakinada, East Godavari District
3. 2 CCs to G.P. for Transport,
High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT)
4 2 C.D copies.