1 19-wp-7455-11.sxw jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7455 OF 2011 RRC International Freight Services Ltd. and Ors. ..Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Victor K. Fernandes for Petitioners. Mrs. A.D.Vhatkar AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 23, 2011. P.C. : 1 Rule. By consent of the parties, Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the learned AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2 The Counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are owners of Motor Vehicle (Truck) bearing Registration No. PB-13-L-9326 which was detained and seized by the respondent no.3 on 24.8.2011. It is submitted that the 2 19-wp-7455-11.sxw said vehicle is registered at the office of Regional Transport Officer Punjab. It is submitted that on 4.8.2011 the National Permit Authorization was issued by Transport Department, Punjab in respect of the said vehicle for operating it throughout territory of India and same is valid upto 5.8.2012. 3 The Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the age of the vehicle is 8 years and 5 months and therefore, plying of such vehicles within the limits of Municipal City being prohibited, however, due to inadvertence, the driver of the vehicle being unaware of the prohibitory order dated 3.3.2004 passed by this Court, entered the limits of the Mumbai city. 4 It is contended that the issue is squarely covered by the earlier decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated 27.7.2011 whereby Writ Petition No. 5509 of 2011 came to be disposed of. It is therefore, prayed that the present writ petition may kindly be disposed of in view of the said decision of this Court. The learned AGP does not dispute factual and legal aspects of the matter including the fact that the controversy in issue stands covered by the earlier decision of this Court cited by the Counsel for the 3 19-wp-7455-11.sxw Petitioners. The affidavit dated 23.9.2011 of Inspector of Motor Vehicle Regional Transport Office, Mumbai has been placed on record today. 5 Considered the contentions canvassed by the respective Counsel. In the instant case, it is not at all in dispute that the controversy in question is covered by the decision of this Court dated 27.7.2011 rendered in W.P. No. 5509 of 2011 and therefore, it is not necessary for us to reconsider the same issue afresh in the present writ petition. We have perused the decision of this Court and the relevant portion is in paragraph 6 of the order dated 27.7.2011 which reads thus: “Heard the Counsel for the parties and perused the Order dated 2nd September, 2010 passed in writ petition no. 6877 of 2010. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the issue involved in the present writ petition is identical to one involved in the writ petition no. 6877 of 2010 and is squarely covered by the said decision and therefore, it will be appropriate to incorporate the relevant observations made by the Division Bench of this Court in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the said Order, which reads thus: 4 19-wp-7455-11.sxw `7. In the circumstances, petition is allowed by directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- with Respondent No.3 within a period of two weeks from today. Respondent No.3 shall in turn deposit the amount with the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before respondent no.3 that the petitioner shall not ply the vehicle within the limits of Greater Mumbai. Upon the deposit of the aforesaid amount and on filing of the undertaking by the petitioner, respondent No.3 shall release the vehicle only for taking it out of the limits of Greater Mumbai. 8. We make it clear that for other violations mentioned in the checking report dated 16th August, 2010, it will be open to the respondent authorities to take appropriate action regarding the said violations. This order is passed only in the context of the breach of the orders of this Court prohibiting plying vehicles within the Municipal limits of Greater Mumbai which are more than eight years old.' ” 6 We therefore, dispose of the petition in terms of order dated 2.9.2010 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 6877 of 5 19-wp-7455-11.sxw 2010, on the basis thereof the order dated 27.7.2011 came to be passed in W.P. No. 5509 of 2011, particularly, in view of the observations made by the Division Bench in paragraphs 7 and 8 of the said order. 7 Rule made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs. [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.] [ D.D.SINHA,J.]