HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.33687 of 2011 Date: December 27, 2011 Between: K. Appala Naidu … Petitioner And 1. The Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam District & another. … Respondents * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.33687 of 2011 O R D E R: Petitioner complains of seizure of his lorry bearing No.AP 31Y 9639 on the alleged violation of the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966, (for short ‘the Rules’) and continued seizure and detention of the vehicle is questioned in this writ petition. 2. Learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology, on instructions, submits that the same vehicle has for the second time been involved in a similar offence and as such not entitled for release under Rule 9-X (b) of the Rules, as the offence is repeated once again. 3. The proceedings of seizure, Ex.P-1, shows that the vehicle in question was checked and found transporting sand without transit forms. Rule 9-X (b) of the Rules above permits release of such seized vehicles, if involved in the offence for the first time on specified penalty. The petitioner’s vehicle is reported to be involved for the second time in a similar offence and as such, the penalty as applicable to first time offenders cannot be applied to this case. However, continued detention of the vehicle is detrimental to the petitioner and is of no use to the respondents and as such, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to release the vehicle subject to the following conditions: 1. Petitioner shall pay penalty quantified at Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only); 2. Petitioner shall give an undertaking before the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology concerned that he shall not alienate the vehicle and that he shall produce the vehicle as and when required; and 3. The Assistant Director of Mines & Geology shall conduct enquiry relating to the said seizure after calling for explanation from the petitioner and pass appropriate orders determining the penalty, if any, further required to be imposed on the petitioner. The petitioner is at liberty to produce bills which he claims to support the transport of mineral which is seized in this case and subject to the enquiry the payment of penalty amount as above by the petitioner shall be subject to the final orders in the enquiry. 4. Subject to the above, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: December 27, 2011. BSB