IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 596 of 2009 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 17/02/2009 in WP NO : 2344 OF 2009 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Sri Vidyasai Model School (English Medium), Rep by its Head Master, Sri Anugu Ganga Reddy, S/o. Satyam Reddy, aged about 29 years, R/o. Munnurukapusangham, Kammarapally, Armoor, Nizamabad District. ..... APPELLANT AND 1. The Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Nizamabad. 2 The Motor Vehicles Inspector, Armoor, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: MR.RAJANIKANTH JWALA Counsel for the Respondent: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Division Bench of this Court made the following : Judgment follows 2nd page THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 596 of 2009 JUDGMENT : (Per the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ appeal is filed by Sri Vidyasai Model School (English Medium) represented by its Head Master, Sri Angugu Ganga Reddy, s/o. Satyam Reddy, r/o Munurukappu Sangham, Kammarapalli, Armoor, Nizamabad district, questioning the order dated 17-02-2009 in WP.No. 2344 of 2009 passed by the learned single Judge, whereby the learned single Judge while disposing of the said writ petition directed the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner on condition of his paying the tax and the compounding fees and in so far as the penalty is concerned, the respondents were directed to complete the enquiry expeditiously and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 2. In the writ petition, the petitioner sought the relief of a writ of mandamus to declare the seizure and detention of vehicle bearing R.No.AP-37-T 4577 seized under Vehicle Check Report No.0054239 dated 17-1-2008 by the second respondent as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction and contrary to the mandatory provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and consequently to direct the respondents to release the petitioner’s institution vehicle bearing R.No.AP37-T 4577 forthwith to the petitioner. 3. Sri Rajanikanth Jwala, the learned counsel representing the petitioner’s institution submitted that the petitioner’s institution is a small school in a remote village. The petitioner’s institution owns a bus bearing Regdn.No.AP37-T 4577 with seating capacity of 60 (59 + 1) and covered by all valid documents and payment of prescribed tax upto the quarter ending i.e. 30-6-2006. The said vehicle came up for major engine and body repairs during the month of June 2006 and since then the bus is being kept at the workshop at Armoor for undergoing repairs and the said fact was also intimated to the respondent authorities. After completion of repairs, the said bus was kept at the petitioner’s school premises on 17-11-2008. On the same day, the empty stationed bus kept in the school premises was checked and inspected by the second respondent and the same was seized vide check report dated 17-11- 2008 on the ground that the bus was plying without any valid documents with school children. Therefore, the petitioner approached the first respondent seeking release of the bus, in vain. The learned single Judge after hearing both sides disposed of the said writ petition and directed the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner on condition of his paying the tax and the compounding fees and in so far as the penalty is concerned, the respondents were directed to complete the enquiry expeditiously and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner-institution is a small school and it is not in a position to pay the tax and compounding fees as demanded by the respondent-authorities and requested this court to modify the order passed by the learned single Judge in the writ petition aforesaid. 4. Per Contra, the learned Government Pleader for Transport on instructions reports that the Deputy Transport Commissioner and SRTA Nizamabad as per which the appellant-institution has to pay a sum of Rs.22,330/- towards the tax and penalty of Rs.40,600/- and Rs.25,375/- towards the compounding fee. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-institution as well as the learned Government Pleader for Transport and perused the order impugned and the connected record produced before this court. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having heard the learned counsel for the appellant-institution and the learned Government Pleader for Transport, we deem it appropriate to modify the order passed by the learned single Judge to the extent of directing the respondents to release the aforesaid vehicle on condition of the appellant-institution paying the tax and Rs.10,000/- towards compounding fee and the order of the learned single Judge in all other respect is confirmed. 7. With the above modification in the impugned order, the writ appeal is disposed of at the admission stage. No costs. _______________________ JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI. ____________________________ JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZUL PURKAR. 29-4-2009. I s L NB: Furnish CC in two days. B/o. I s L