Telangana High Court
WP/40238/2012 of B. Srisailam, S/o B. Venkulu, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh, on 31 December 2012
L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.40238 of 2012 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of a good vehicle bearing No.AP 29 TB 6648. It is stated that the vehicle was seized by the 4th respondent herein on 14.12.2012, on the ground that it was used in transporting sand without valid
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.
Conclusion
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDYWRIT PETITION No.40238 of 2012ORDER:
The petitioner claims to be the owner of a goodvehicle bearing No.AP 29 TB 6648. It is stated that thevehicle was seized by the 4[th] respondent herein on14.12.2012, on the ground that it was used intransporting sand without valid permit. Crime No.112 of2012 was registered. The petitioner challenges thesame.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner andlearned counsel for the respondents.
The only ground on which the vehicle was seizedis that it was used in transporting sand without validpermit. The Andhra Pradesh Minor MineralConcession Rules, 1966, provide for levy of penalty atthe rate of Rs.20,000/- per heavy goods vehicle. Onpayment of penalty, the vehicle can be released. However, if the vehicle was involved in similar crimes onearlier occasion, the facility would not be available.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directingthe 4[th] respondent that, in case the vehicle in questionwas not involved in similar offences or acts on earlieroccasion and was not levied any penalty, it shall bereleased on payment of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees TwentyThousand Only). In case, the vehicle was involved insimilar offences or acts on earlier occasion, therespondents need not release the vehicle and it shall be open to them to take necessary steps in accordancewith law. For that purpose, the petitioner shall file anaffidavit stating whether or not the vehicle was seizedon earlier occasion, on the same allegation.
The miscellaneous petition filed in this writ petitionshall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order asto costs.
____________________
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J
Date: 31.12.2012JSU
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.40238 of 2012
Date: 31.12.2012
JSU