THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 400 of 2010 19.01.2010 Between: T. Bhanu Prasad …… Petitioner and The Joint Transport Commissioner & Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Khairatabad, Hyderabad and another ….. Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 400 of 2010 O R D E R: In this Writ Petition, the petitioner questions the seizure of his vehicle bearing Registration No. AP 04V 2345 by the 2nd respondent on 09.01.2010. The contention of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the aforesaid vehicle and has obtained temporary permit, valid from 09.01.2010 to 20.01.2010 to carry the persons from Hyderabad to Simhachalam and accordingly, on 08.01.2010 midnight, the journey was started to Simhachalam. But however, a perusal of the check report No. 1820111, dated 09.01.2010 reveals that the aforesaid vehicle was plying as express stage carriage with the passengers from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam by collecting individual fares, in violation of the permit conditions, and, therefore, the vehicle was seized in exercise of the powers available under Section 8 of the A.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act and also under Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport. Now, it is brought to the notice of this Court that though the vehicle was seized on 09.01.2010, no enquiry into the allegations made in the check report has been undertaken so far. Whether the vehicle was being plied as contract carriage or not is a matter for determination during the course of enquiry to be conducted by the 1st respondent. Be that as it may, since the vehicle was seized as early as on 09.01.2010, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to release the vehicle in question to the petitioner, subject to his depositing Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) and submitting an undertaking to the effect that he will not alienate, transfer or create any 3rd party interest over the vehicle, till the orders considered appropriate are passed in the enquiry by the 1st respondent. The amount to be deposited by the petitioner shall be subject to the outcome of the orders that may be passed by the 1st respondent. Subject to the above, the Writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ---------------------------- (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) 19th January 2010 Note: Issue CC tomorrow ksld