IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.28776 OF 2011 Date:31-10-2011 Between:- Kummari Suresh … Petitioner And The Deputy Transport Commissioner & Secretary, SRTA, Warangal and others … Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No.28776 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 action of the 2nd respondent in issuing vehicle check report No.1333139, dated 21-08-2011, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner Tata Ace Magic HT 8 Seater BS III bearing Chassis No.MAT 445112BVA04951 and its Engine No.275IDI06.AYYS10533. 2. The brier facts that are necessary for disposal of the writ petition may be stated as follows: The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle Tata Ace – 8 Seater and he is using the said vehicle for transporting the passengers. While so, on 21-08-2011 when the vehicle was plying in the Regonda Police Station limits, it met with an accident and the driver of the vehicle died at the spot. The Regonda Police registered a case in Crime No.96 of 2011 for the oﬀences under Sections 304-A and 337 IPC. The Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector, D.T.C., SRTA Warangal, 2nd respondent herein, checked the vehicle and seized the same on the allegation that the vehicle was plying without documents and he issued a check document vide check report No.1333139 and handed over the vehicle to the 3rd respondent for safe custody. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent stating that all the documents of the vehicle are available with him and requested for release of the vehicle, but the respondents did not release the vehicle. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the 1st respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that since the driver of the vehicle in question, died on the spot in the accident, no documents were produced at the time of check by the 2nd respondent and all the documents are available with the owner of the vehicle and therefore, he prays to issue a direction to the 2nd respondent to release the vehicle. 5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, contended that unless all the valid documents are produced and the payment of tax is made, the vehicle cannot be released. 6. There cannot be any dispute that without payment of Tax, no vehicle can be permitted to ply on the road. The petitioner has to pay the Tax as per law. Therefore, the seizure of the vehicle cannot be said to be illegal when the petitioner was plying the vehicle. The driver of the vehicle in question died on the spot in the accident. Therefore, the relevant documents, such as, registration certiﬁcate, ﬁtness certiﬁcate, permit, driving licence etc., could not be produced before the authorities. In view of the fact that all the documents of the vehicle are available with the petitioner, he can produce the same before the 1st respondent. 7. Hence, the petitioner is directed to produce the relevant documents of the vehicle before the 1st respondent and deposit the tax due, if any, and also to pay the Tax and to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/- before the 1st respondent, who shall, thereafter, release the vehicle. The amount so deposited by the petitioner shall be subject to result of the decision that may be taken by the 1st respondent. 8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________ K.C. BHANU, J October 31, 2011. KT L