IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32066 OF 2011 Date:07-12-2011 Between:- M. Rambabu Reddy … Petitioner And The Regional Transport Officer, Office of the Regional Transport Authority, Secunderabad and others … Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.32066 OF 2011 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus declaring the seizure and continued detention of the vehicle of the petitioner Tata Indica Vista bearing No.MH-17 AE 2565 seized under Vehicle check report No.0908452, dated 29-11-2011, by the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to release the petitioner’s vehicle forthwith. 2. The brier facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner is the resident of Shirdi, Maharashtra and he is the owner of the vehicle Tata Indica Vista bearing registration No.MH- 17 AE 2565, which was registered at Deputy Regional Transport Office, Srirampur in Maharashtra State and he is using the same for his own and family purpose. The vehicle is having valid insurance and the petitioner is paying the life tax for the vehicle at RTO, Srirampur. The petitioner is also having valid driving licence. While so, on 28-11- 2011 at about 11.40 PM, the petitioner started to Hyderabad in his vehicle to drop his relatives, who came to Shirdi for darshan of Lord Baba. On 29-11-2011 at 9.10 AM at Tadbund point, the RTA officials stopped the vehicle and checked the same. They asked for the relevant documents relating to the vehicle. The petitioner showed the documents and requested to permit them to go. But, without hearing the petitioner, the 2nd respondent – the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Hyderabad, FC Testing Station, Tirumalgery, Hyderabad, written a vehicle check report No.0908452 and seized the vehicle. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Shirdi of Maharashtra State, that the tax of the vehicle was paid at Maharashtra, that the vehicle was taken to Secunderabad to drop the relatives of the petitioner only and the same is not used to ply on the roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh, but the respondents seized the same as the life tax was not paid, therefore, he prays to give a direction to the respondents to release the vehicle. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Transport, appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, contended that since the vehicle was being plied without there being any payment of tax, that the vehicle was rightly seized by the authorities concerned, and there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 6. The vehicle is having all the documents required under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The only reason for seizure of the vehicle is that it was being plied on the roads within the State of Andhra Pradesh, without paying any tax. The case of the petitioner is that he is permanent resident of Shirdi and the vehicle was taken to Hyderabad to drop his relatives. Since the vehicle is not plying continuously on the roads in the State of Andhra Pradesh, the same can be released on some conditions. 7. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing 1st respondent – Regional Transport Officer, Office of the Regional Transport Authority, Secunderabad, to release the vehicle on depositing a sum of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioner, which shall be subject to decision that many be taken by the 1st respondent in pursuance of check report. It is further directed that the petitioner shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the concerned authority and the petitioner shall not transfer the vehicle in the name of any other person. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ K.C. BHANU, J December 07, 2011. KTL