THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.5947 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner undertakes shipping services at Kakinada. It has acquired a Mobile Harbour Crane for its use. It is stated that the crane is fixed almost at a particular place and it is used in loading and unloading of cargo and other material in the ships. The Motor Vehicles Inspector, Kakinada, the 6th respondent herein, inspected the crane, being operated by the petitioner. He took the view that the crane is “Construction Equipment” as defined under Rule 2(ca) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for short ‘the Rules’) and on finding that it was neither registered, nor life tax and other amounts were paid, he effected the seizure of the crane through check report dated 15.02.2011. He entrusted the custody thereof to Port Security Staff. The petitioner challenges the seizure of the equipment. It is pleaded that the crane is by no means a motor vehicle and it was not liable to be registered. The petitioner further states that the 6th respondent has straight away seized the equipment and entrusted the custody thereof to the port security, and thereby, disabled them from using it. The petitioner strongly urges that the crane is not a ‘construction equipment’, as defined under the Rules. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Transport. Identical question arose in W.P.No.5049 of 2011. The only difference is that the District Transport Authorities of Visakhapatnam passed an order holding that the crane of similar nature is liable for registration and payment of life tax etc., after issuing notice. The petitioner therein submitted a representation to the Transport Commissioner, State of A.P., in relation thereto. Taking note of the same, this Court directed the Transport Commissioner to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders. The proceedings that were issued holding that the crane is liable to be registered were kept in abeyance. Similar course can be adopted in the instant case. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Transport Commissioner, State of Andhra Pradesh, the 3rd respondent herein, within 15 days from today, regarding application of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules made thereunder for their crane. The 3rd respondent in turn shall pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the vehicle check report dated 15.02.2011, shall not be given effect to. There shall be no order as costs. _____________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. Dt.14.03.2011. GJ