E. Govindaraj, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD
FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION NO. 29297 OF 2015 Between:
E. Govindaraj ... Petitioner Vs.
The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by its Prl.Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & Ors. ... Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri T.D. Phani Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Home [AP] GP for Revenue [AP] The Court made the following: [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION NO. 29297 OF 2015
O R D E R :
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the following relief : "To declare the action of the respondents in seizing the petitioner's lorry bearing No. TN-22-BZ3803 without following any procedure known to law as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to release the above vehicle from the custody of the respondents forthwith and to pass such other suitable orders as this court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that this Court disposed of similar writ petition in WP.No. 98 of 2015 by an order dated 07/1/2015 directing release of the vehicle subject to certain conditions laid down therein and the same is not disputed or denied by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue as well as the Government Pleader for Home.
3. Following the ratio laid down in the said writ petition, the petitioner is directed to submit a representation to the officer, who seized the vehicle for its release, the said officer shall within three days from the date of receipt of the representation examine whether the vehicle was used in committing the offence for the
first or the second time; and if so, consider directing release of the vehicle on payment of the prescribed penalty and also execution of a bond in accordance with Rule 18 of Rules being executed by the owner of the vehicle for its production as and when directed by the competent court to which such seizure was reported by the officer who seized the vehicle.
4. The entire exercise, culminating in an order being passed, shall be completed within three days from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner and necessary action shall be taken for release of the vehicle, in cases falling within the ambit of Rule 18 (1) (a) on payment of the prescribed penalty and also execution of bond being executed in terms of Rule 18 (vii) of the Rules.
5. According, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.
_____________________ JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
23/09/2015 I s L HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V. SESHA SAI
WRIT PETITION NO. 29297 OF 2015 Date:23/09/2015 Circulation No.
Court Master: I s L