IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO.9817 of 2008 Between: M. Sunil Kumar S/o Devender Reddy, R/o Type 4/A, D. No. 14 Minister Road, Bharani Co-op Housing Society, Secunderabad. ...PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Secretary, Regional Transport Authority (North Zone) Secunderabad. 2 The Motor Vehicles Inspector, FCTS RTA, Hyderabad (CZ) Trimulgherry, Secunderbad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, declaring the seized of the petitioner's vehicle bearing No. KA/36-3516 seized under vehicle check report No. 2497288, dated 22.04.2008 by the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner forthwith and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.B.SIVA RAMA KRISHNAIAH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.Y.SOMAYAJULU WRIT PETITION NO.9817 of 2008 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) The petitioner’s motor vehicle bearing No.KA/36 - 3516 was seized by the second respondent on 22.04.2008 vide Vehicle Check Report No.2497288 for certain irregularities pointed out in the said vehicle check report. The seizure was affected under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have not yet released the vehicle. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport. Since no purpose would be served by keeping the vehicle in the custody of the respondents and the vehicle would only get damaged, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to forthwith release the subject motor vehicle to the interim custody of the petitioner subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) and on filing an undertaking that he would not transfer the vehicle pending enquiry and that he would produce the vehicle as and when the same is required by the respondent authorities in the course of enquiry and investigation. No order as to costs. With these directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) __________________ (C.Y.SOMAYAJULU, J) 30th April 2008 Note: Wire at party’s cost B/O RRB