1. wp 9737-11.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9737 OF 2011 Jitendra Poonam Chawala .. Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Ms. A.P. Madhuri for the Petitioner Mr. Sameer Patil, AGP for the Respondents CORAM : S.A. BOBDE & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ Reserved on : 20th December, 2011. Pronounced on : 23rd December, 2011. P.C.: [ Per Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J. ] 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGP. 2. The subject matter of this writ petition is light motor vehicle bearing registration no. MH-12/AQ-1996 registered with R.T.O. Pune in the State of Maharashtra. When the vehicle entered limits of Mumbai city on 16th August, 2010, respondent no. 2 seized the vehicle and thereafter detained the same on the ground that there was violation of the prohibitory orders passed by this Court in a PIL not to ply the vehicles which are more than eight years old on the roads within the local limits of Mumbai. 1 1. wp 9737-11.doc 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vehicle was manufactured in the year 2002 and if at all it can be said to be more than eight years old, it was only by a few months that the vehicle had crossed the eight year barrier. It is further submitted that the vehicle is registered with R.T.O. Pune in the State of Maharashtra and therefore, the driver and the transporter were not aware of the prohibitory orders of this Court. The learned counsel also relied on the order dated 2nd September, 2010 passed by another Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6998 of 2010 by which this Court directed the authorities to release the vehicle on deposit of Rs. 10000/- and on filing an undertaking not to ply the vehicle within the local limits of Greater Mumbai. 4. The learned AGP opposes the petition. He further submits that the amount of deposit of Rs. 10000/- required to be deposited into the Chief Minister Relief Fund was determined 1 and 1/2 years ago and that now the amount should be enhanced. 5. The vehicle in question, which is registered with R.T.O Pune in the state of Maharashtra, was manufactured about eight years back and it is stated to be the first time that the vehicle had entered the city of Mumbai. In this view of the matter, it can be assumed that the driver and the transporter of the vehicle registered with R.T.O. Pune would not have been aware of the 2 1. wp 9737-11.doc prohibitory orders of this Court. The petitioner also agrees to file an undertaking not to ply the vehicle in question within the limits of Greater Mumbai after the vehicle is released and taken out of the limits of the Mumbai city. 6. In the circumstances, petition is allowed by directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 30,000/- with the R.T.O., Mumbai, within a period of three weeks from today. The R.T.O. shall in turn deposit the amount with the Chief Minister's Relief Fund. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before the R.T.O. that the petitioner shall not ply the vehicle within the limits of Greater Mumbai. Upon the deposit of the aforesaid amount and on filing an Undertaking by the petitioner, the R.T.O. shall release the vehicle only for taking it out of the limits of Greater Mumbai. 7. We make it clear that for other violations, it will be open to the respondent authorities to take appropriate action. This order is passed only in the context of the breach of the orders of this Court prohibiting plying vehicles within the Municipal limits of Greater Mumbai which are more than eight years old. 8. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms. [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J ] [ S.A. BOBDE, J ] 3 1. wp 9737-11.doc 4