IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 315 of 2008 (Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 31/01/2008 in WP NO : 1581 OF 2008 on the file of the High Court.) Between: Jai Shree Transport Company A Partnership Firm rep by its Partner Mr. Anil Ratan Goyal No. 202, 2nd Floor, Chenoy Trade Centre, Park Lane, Secunderabad -03 ..... APPELLANT AND 1 The State Transport Authority Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad rep by its Secretary 2 Regional Transport Authority Medak district. 3 Motor Vehicle Inspector Office of the Dy. Transport Commissioner Sanga Reddy. Medak District. .....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Appellant: SRI VALLURI MOHAN SRINIVAS Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 315 of 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble Smt JusticeT. Meena Kumari ) The present writ appeal is filed against the order, dated 31.1.2008 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.1581 of 2008 and WPMP No.1929 of 2008. The appellant herein is the writ petitioner. It has filed the above writ petition seeking to declare the action of the respondents in imposing the challan amount of Rs.1,06,300/- for allegedly carrying excess gross vehicle weight as illegal and arbitrary. Along with the writ petition, the appellant also filed the above WPMP No.1929 of 2008 seeking a direction to the respondents to release the trailer Nos.HR 38 N 7700 (puller) Specialized Trailor HR 55 G 2800 and HR 38 N 6500 along with the load thereon and along with their documents so as to enable the petitioner-appellant to continue to jointly carry upto the permitted gross weight as mentioned in the respective registration certificates of the trailors and as authorized in G.O.1, S.O. 704 (E) Dated 3.5.2007 and 2 S.O.1871 (E) dated 2.11.2007. The learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition directing that the appellant-petitioner shall furnish a bank guarantee for the sum of Rs.1,06,300/- (Rupees One Lakh Six thousand Three Hundred only) demanded through check report dated 25.1.2008 and to pay the tax due, if any on the vehicle and on the petitioner making the payments as mentioned in (i) and (ii) supra, the Regional Transport Officer, Medak shall release the two trailers, prime mover and transformer seized under check report No.0595564, dated 25.1.2008 and the petitioner shall not alienate or alter in any manner the nature of the prime mover and the trailers pending enquiry before the Regional Transport Officer, Medak-respondent No.2. Consequently, WPMP was dismissed. Having aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge, the appellant-writ petitioner filed the present appeal contending that the learned single Judge failed to adjudicate the matter in relation to the main prayer of the writ petition and to declare the imposition of penalty. It is further contended before us that the petitioner-appellant has never carried on much load as alleged by the authorities. At the outset, it is pertinent to note that on 3.4.2008, a Division Bench of this Court while admitting the writ appeal, ordered that the respondent-authorities shall try to see that the enquiry shall be completed as soon as possible, preferably, within a period of eight weeks from today. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, We feel that the issue as to the weighing of the load in question, falls within the domain of the authorities to enquire into the said aspect. As already stated, this Court has directed the authorities to complete the enquiry. In such a situation, if the appellant-petitioner is aggrieved by such out come of the enquiry, a remedy is always available to it by way of a statutory appeal before the appropriate authorities. In such circumstances of the case, We have no hesitation to hold that the relief that is sought for by the appellant in the writ petition at this stage of the proceedings, cannot be entertained. Hence, We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. However, the appellant-petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedies that are available under law. No order as to costs. _________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ______________________ Justice Sanjay Kumar Gurc/nn Dated: 1/6/2009 THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT APPEAL NO : 315 of 2008 (Judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Smt JusticeT. Meena Kumari ) Dated: 1.6.2009