IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 7573 of 2009 Between: Abdul Gaffar, S/o.Mr. Abdul Daud, R/o. Pusad, Yavatmal District, Maharashtra State. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Transport Commissiner Adilabad, A.P., 2 The Regional Transport Authority, Mancherial, Adiabad District. 3 The Motor Vehicle Inspector, On Vigilance Duty, Office of RTA, Ranga Reddy 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 a writ, order or direction, more particularly a writ of Madnamus declaring the seizure on 06.03.2009 of the Petitioner's Vehicle LMV Jeep bearing Registration No. M H-30 F-183 by the Respondents is illegal and void in the interest of justice and equity or pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.MOHAMMED RAHAIL AHMED Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner claims to be a native of State of Maharastra and a businessman. He purchased a LMV Jeep (Mahindra Commander) bearing Registration No.MH-30 F-183 under a hire purchase agreement in the year 2007. The said vehicle was originally registered at the office of the RTO Washim District, Maharastra on 11.2.2000 by the original owner and subsequently the petitioner purchased the same and registered it at the office of the Dy.RTC Akola, Yavatmal District, Maharastra. As there were some technical problems in the said vehicle, he left the vehicle with his cousin at Asifabad on 28.2.2009 for getting repaired. The said vehicle was seized by the transport authority vide check report dated 6.3.2009 on the ground that the vehicle was being run as a stage carriage without any permit even though the petitioner never use his vehicle as a stage carriage and, therefore, he approached the 2nd respondent seeking release of the vehicle, in vain. Hence this writ petition. The learned Government Pleader for Transport has produced before this Court the instructions obtained by him from the Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary, RTA, Adilabad, as per which the petitioner has to pay a sum of Rs.15,730/- towards the tax and also has to pay the compounding fee as per G.O.Ms.No.242 dated 27.11.2006 apart from penalty. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar circumstances, this Court has disposed of various writ petitions directing the release of the seized vehicles on payment of tax and compounding fees and so far as the penalty is concerned, the respondent authority has to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders expeditiously, which is not disputed by the learned Government Pleader. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner on condition of his paying the tax and the compounding fees. So far as the penalty is concerned, the respondents are directed to complete the enquiry expeditiously and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. It is made clear that since the petitioner is disputing the quantum of tax demanded by the respondent authorities, any amount paid by the petitioner pursuant to this order would be subject to the outcome of the enquiry to be conducted by the authorities. N.V.RAMANA,J DT.17.4.2009 Note: Furnish CC in two days (B/o) msv