( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 586 OF 2009 Ramchandra s/o Balbhadra Kayal PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.G. Bhalerao, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. R.D. Reddy, APP for the respondent/State. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 14th August, 2009] PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The vehicle of the petitioner bearing registration No. MH-38/D-93 (tanker) was intercepted during course of a drive conducted by the R.T.O., Aurangabad in order to check the laden weight. Though ( 2 ) the laden weight should have been of 25,000 kgs., as per the prescribed provision under the schedule attached to the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it was found that the weight of the goods was excessive to the extent of 10,030 kgs. 3. The petitioner submits that the R.T.O. certificate issued to him indicates that the vehicle may carry laden weight to the extent of 35,000 kgs. Inspection report purports to show that this entry in the registration certificate of the petitioner’s vehicle was erroneously recorded by the concerned office. What appears from the record is that the petitioner purchased tanker vehicle from a party in another State and got it transferred at R.T.O. office, Hingoli and probably, the mistake which was already done by the earlier R.T.O. office was carried forward by the R.T.O. office at Hingoli. Even assuming that it was the mistake of the said office, then also it can be rectified in accordance with the rules. The petitioner is already in possession of the relevant documents which were seized and the vehicle is also in his possession as per the interim orders of this Court. 4. No prosecution is initiated against the petitioner so far. The learned APP makes a statement, on instructions, that there is no proposal for any prosecution of the petitioner for the present. Therefore, in terms of the interim relief, the petition ( 3 ) can be conveniently disposed of with further direction that if at all any action is contemplated against the petitioner, no coercive action be taken against him, without service of prior notice of 15 days. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/cri586-09