THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR Writ Petition No.9978 of 2009 ORDER: (per Sri V.Eswaraiah, J) The case of the petitioner is that she is the registered owner of light motor vehicle bearing Registration No.AP 37U 7877 and plying the same without any contravention. While so, on 19.04.2009, the second respondent checked and seized the said vehicle under Section 8 of the Motor Vehicle Taxation Act and Section 207 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for the alleged irregularities that the vehicle is plying without valid documents, such as, RC, FC, Tax, IC, PUC and DL) and that no registration mark was exhibited; and was kept at Narsapur Fire Station for safe custody. It is stated that as against the said seizure, the petitioner filed an application on 28.04.2009 before the first respondent seeking release of the vehicle under Rule 448-B of A.P. Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. But, without taking any action thereon, the first respondent issued proceedings in R.No.3448/C4/09, dated 30.04.2009, stating that the last tax paid was valid upto 30.06.2003 and, therefore, she has to pay the arrears of tax from 30.09.2003 to 30.06.2009 amounting to Rs.30,720/- along with double the penalty of Rs.61,440/-, apart from compounding fee of Rs.5,525/-, totaling Rs.97,685/-. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed. The petitioner has not disputed about non-payment of tax from 30.09.2003 to 30.06.2009. Therefore, we are of the opinion that unless the petitioner pays the tax amount of Rs.30,720/-, she is not entitled for release of the vehicle. Further, the petitioner has not filed a copy of the application said to have been made on 28.04.2009 seeking release of the vehicle and there is no mention about payment of the aforesaid tax amount. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner bearing Registration No.AP 37U 7877, subject to payment of tax amount of Rs.30,720/- (Rupees thirty thousand seven hundred and twenty only) and on furnishing an undertaking to the effect that she shall not alienate the vehicle, till the proceedings in pursuance of the Check Report are finalized and that she shall produce the vehicle as and when required. Insofar as penalty and compounding fee is concerned, we are of the opinion that the petitioner shall be given reasonable opportunity of notice for collecting the same. Therefore, it is open for the respondents to take appropriate action in accordance with law, for collecting penalty and compounding fee, after giving notice to the petitioner. No order as to costs. _________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J __________________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J Dt.13.05.2009 VGB/PRV/LMV