WP/38913/2013 of Dandi Srikanth, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh on 31 December 2013

ORDER:

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to declare the action of therespondents, in seizing the petitioner’s vehicle without following anyprocedure, as illegal and arbitrary.

Learned Government Pleader for Mines & Industries would drawattention of this Court to the new Rules which have been made and notified in G.O.Ms.No.186 dated 17.12.2013 modifying the earlier Rules regulatingquarrying and transportation of sand.

Rule 9-Q (1) prescribes a penalty for the first and second offences. Under rule 9-Q (1) (ii) if the vehicle is found to be involved in an offence morethan two times, it shall, along with sand, be liable for confiscation. Rule 9-Q(2) provides for seizure of the vehicle. 9-Q (3) stipulates that the authorizedofficer, who has seized the vehicle, shall order confiscation of the vehicle soseized. Rule 9-Q (4) stipulates that no order of confiscation of any vehicleshall be made, under sub-rule (3), unless the person from whom the vehicleis seized is given: (i) a notice in writing informing him of the grounds on whichit is proposed to confiscate such property; (ii) an opportunity of making arepresentation in writing within such time as may be specified in the noticeagainst the grounds for confiscation; and (iii) a reasonable opportunity ofbeing heard in the matter. Rule 9-Q (5) prohibits confiscation, under sub-rule(3), being made of any vehicle if the owner of the vehicle proves, to thesatisfaction of the authorized officer, that it was used in carrying on operationswithout his knowledge or connivance or the knowledge or connivance of hisagent, if any, or the person in charge of the vehicle in committing the offence;and each of them had taken all reasonable and necessary precautionsagainst such use. Under the proviso to Rule 9-Q (5), no order prejudicial toany person shall be passed without being afforded an opportunity of beingheard. Rule 9-Q (6) stipulates that any officer who has seized any vehicleunder Sub-rule (1)(ii), and where he makes a report of such seizure to theCompetent Court under sub-rule (2), may release the same on the executionof a bond by the owner thereof for the production of the vehicle so releasedas and when directed by the competent Court. Under Rule 9-Q (8), uponreceipt of any report under sub-rule (2), the Magistrate shall take suchmeasures as may be necessary for the trial of the accused and the disposalof the vehicle according to law.

The amended Rules, notified in G.O.Ms.No.186 dated 17.12.2013,prescribe a penalty for the first and second offences and, thereafter, for theconfiscation of the vehicle after following the procedure stipulated therein. Even in cases where a vehicle is sought to be confiscated, the officer whoseizes the vehicle is empowered to direct its release under Rule 9-Q (6) on execution of a bond by the owner thereof for production of the vehicle soreleased as and when directed by the Competent Court. Proceedings forconfiscation can be instituted in cases where the offences which have beencommitted are for the third or more times.

In view of the amended Rule 9-Q (1) (i) and (ii), read with Rule

9-Q (6), the petitioner is permitted to submit an application to the officer, whoseized the vehicle; the said officer shall, within three days from the date ofreceipt of the application; examine whether the vehicle was used incommitting the offence for the first and the second time; and, if so, considerdirecting release of the vehicle on payment of the prescribed penalty. If, onthe other hand, the vehicle is found to have been used in the commission ofthe offence, for three or more times, the officer concerned shall considerdirecting release of the vehicle, in accordance with Rule 9-Q (6), on a bondbeing executed by the owner of the vehicle for its production as and whendirected by the Court.

The entire exercise, culminating in an order being passed, shall becompleted within three days from the date of submission of the representationby the petitioner; and necessary action shall be taken for release of thevehicle, in cases falling within the ambit of Rule 9-Q(1)(i), on payment of theprescribed penalty; and, in other cases, on a bond being executed in terms ofRule 9-Q (6) of the Rules.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly. The miscellaneouspetitions pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be noorder as to costs.

December 31[st], 2013.ssp

___________________

P.NAVEEN RAO, J