IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO : 19248 of 2009 Between: P.Lakshminarayana . .Petitioner And The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Kakinada and another. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION NO.19248 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in seizing the auto bearing registration No.AP 37 W 6605 belonging to the petitioner in connection with Crime No.164 of 2008-09, on the file of the 2nd respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to release the said auto in favour of the petitioner forthwith. The brief facts are that the petitioner is the owner of the auto bearing registration No.AP 37 W 6605. On 12.11.2008 the 2nd respondent-Sub Inspector of Prohibition and Excise, Amalapuram seized the said vehicle on the ground that a passenger traveling in the said auto was found in possession of 100 liters of ID liquor and a case was registered against the said person in Crime No.164/2008-09 for the offences punishable under Sections 7(A) read with Section 8(e) of Andhra Pradesh Prohibition Act, 1995. According to the petitioner, though he has nothing to do with the said ID liquor and as the said vehicle is his prime livelihood, he approached the 1st respondent and filed an application on 15.12.2008 seeking interim custody of the said vehicle. But, however, no orders have yet been passed. Thereafter, the 1st respondent issued a show cause notice dated 27.08.2009 calling for an explanation from the petitioner as to why the said vehicle shall not be confiscated in favour of the Government. Hence, the petitioner approached this Court and filed the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Prohibition and Excise. In my considered view, the authorities ought to have passed an order on the application dated 15.12.2008 submitted by the petitioner seeking interim custody of the vehicle. Whether the vehicle is involved in the said crime or not is the question to be decided during the course of enquiry and this Court feels that the said vehicle unnecessarily kept idle for the last about 9 months. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with a direction to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry into the said crime, but however, the auto bearing No.AP 37 W 6605 shall be released in favour of the petitioner on his furnishing bank guarantee as assessed by the Motor Vehicles Inspector. The petitioner is further directed not to alienate the said vehicle and create any sort of encumbrance. No order as to costs. ________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J September 11, 2009 Note: Issue C.C. by two days. (B/o) KSH