IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM WRIT PETITION NO : 15112 of 2008 Between: K. Laxman, S/o. K. Shivalingam, Registered Owner of Auto Bearing No. AP 25 U 4901, R/o. H.No. 1-314/1, Khandgoan (V) Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Joint Collector, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 2 The Assistant Director of Agriculture, Bodhan, Nizamabad District. 3 The Mandal Agriculture Officer, Bodhan Mandal, Nizamabad District. 4 The Station House Officer, Rural Police Station, Bodhan, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a Writ, Order or direction more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 3 and 4 either to deposit the vehicle bearing No. AP25U4901 which was seized by the 3rd respondent and other officials on 19-6-2008 alleging the offences under Section 420IPC and Section 3(4) of Essential Commodities Act and 9 of Fertilizer Control Order (mentioned in the remand C.D. As Fertilizer Act) in the court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bodhan, Nizamabad District or to report the matter to the 1st respondent under the provisions of Essential Commodities Act to enable the petitioner for seeking release of the above mentioned vehicle before the appropriate forums and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.V.RAVI KIRAN RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM W.P.No. 15112 of 2008 Oral Order: The learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies on the basis of written instructions received from the 3rd respondent states that the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bodhan had passed orders releasing the Auto belonging to the petitioner bearing No. AP.25U 4901 to the interim custody of the petitioner on terms. The learned counsel for the petitioner is satisfied. In the light of the above orders of the release by the Court of competent jurisdiction, the grievance of the petitioner does not subsist. In view of the above developments, no further proceedings are warranted. The writ petition is dismissed as ‘infructuous’. No costs. ____________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J Dated: 21-07-2008 pvks