IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 19907 of 2004 Between: S. Narayana Goud, S/o. S. Laxmaiah Goud, Sangam Kalan Village, Tandur Mandal, R.R. District (Owner of the Tractor & Trailor bearing No. AP28/U-3405&3406). ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise Hyderabad Division at Nampally, Hyderabad. 2 The Inspector Prohibition & Excise (SHO) Tandur Circle at Tandur, R.R. District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the proceedings vide Cr.No.C6/3912/2004 dated 23-10-2004 and Crime No.231/2004-05dated 22-09-2004 passed by the 1st and 2nd respondents respectively, as illegal, in pursuance of the Excise Policy excise para 18 of the Excise Year 2003-04 issued G.O.Ms.No.998 revenue (Excise-II) Department dt. 1-10-2003 and para 16 of the present Excise Policy issued G.O.Ms.No. 767 Revenue (Excise-II) Department dated 29-9-2004. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.B.SAI RAM GOUD Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following : ORDER: Petitioner questions the action of the respondents in not releasing the tractor and trailor bearing No.AP28/U-3405 & 3406 pending disposal of the confiscation proceedings before the 1st respondent-Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition & Excise, Hyderabad. 2. During pendency of the confiscation proceedings, 1st respondent rejected the interim release of the vehicle by order, dated 23-10-2004, vide proceedings in Cr.No.C6/3912/04, which was seized by the Station House Officer, Tandur in Cr.No.231/2004-05 on 22-09-2004. This Court by order, dated 30-12-2004, in W.P.M.P.No.26043 of 2004 directed the 1st respondent to release the tractor and trailor of the petitioner on condition of the petitioner furnishing a written undertaking to the 1st respondent not to alienate or otherwise dispose of the tractor or trailor pending finalization of the further proceedings under the A.P.Excise Act and further undertaking to produce the same as and when required by the 1st respondent. 3. As the vehicle was not released and it is not known what happened to the confiscation proceedings, and as the scope of the petition is only to release the tractor and trailor pending confiscation proceedings, Writ Petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid interim order. If ultimately final orders are passed by the 1st respondent confiscating the said vehicle, petitioner shall produce the said vehicle giving custody to the department. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J 13th March, 2008 Tsy