IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 1170 of 2005 Between: M.Mohana Rao, s/o Satya Rao, r/o Visakhapatnam. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State Bank of India, rep., by its Branch Manager, Bhogapuram Branch, Bhogapuram, Vizianagaram. 2 The Regional Transport Officer, Vizianagaram. .....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 more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 1st respondent in seizing the tractor and trailor bearing No.AP-35-T-1086, AP-35-T-1087 and consequential proceedings R.No.8510/B2/2004 dt.20-12-2004 issued by the 2nd respondent as void, illegal, contrary to law and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.T.S.ANAND Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No : 1170 of 2005 O R D E R : This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the first respondent-State Bank of India in seizing the tractor and trailor bearing No.AP-35-T-1086, AP-35-T-1087 as well as the consequential proceedings dated 20-12-2004 issued by the Regional Transport Officer, Vizianagaram, is arbitrary and illegal. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is represented by the learned counsel for the first respondent that auction was already conducted on 29-03-2007 in which the seized tractor and trailor were sold and the possession was handed over to the auction purchaser on 09-04-2007 and the sale proceedings were adjusted towards the loan account. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that in spite of the registered letter addressed, there is no response from the petitioner. In the circumstances, recording the statement of the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent-Bank, the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to initiate fresh proceedings in case necessity thereof arises. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Dated: 20-01-2009 KLP