IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 11746 of 2008 Between: Rathod Parusuram S/o.Kishan R/o.H.No.1-A, Jairamuga village Post Devapura, Mandal Kerameri District Adilabad ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Dy.Transport Commissioner, Adilabad 2 The Motor Vehicle Inspector, Maancherial Adilabad Districty 3 The Depot Manager, Mancherial, Adilabad 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 an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in seizing the motor Vehicle No. MH 29 7860 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and against the principle of natural justice and consequently set aside the impugned order No.1018391 dated 19.4.2008 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.JOGRAM TEJAVAT Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus declaring action of the second respondent in seizing the petitioner’s vehicle bearing Registration No.MH.29/7860 vide VCR No. 1018391 dated 19.4.2008, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to release the said vehicle to the petitioner, pending enquiry, the petitioner filed this writ petition. Petitioner is the registered owner of the above said vehicle and had been operating the same as a contract carriage for public transport. The vehicle was plying from Asifabad to Kondagathu and it was found carrying 15 persons without permit and without tax PSV badge. Consequently, the said vehicle was seized under Check Report No. 1018391 and kept Mancherial Depot for custody. Hence, the present writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport appearing for the respondents. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said vehicle was idle. Though several contentions are sought to be raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner, but as can be seen from the check report, the vehicle was plying without permit and tax was also not paid. Therefore, having regard to the fact that enquiry is pending before the second respondent, without expressing any opinion on merits, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to release the vehicle bearing registration No.MH.29/7860, subject to the payment of Rs.15,000/- and furnishing an undertaking to the effect that the vehicle in question will not be alienated and no encumbrance will be created and shall produce the vehicle as and when required by the respondents. It is made clear that the amount paid pursuant to this order, shall be subject to the result of the enquiry. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ T.MEENA KUMARI, J. ___________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. June 10, 2008 MAS. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK}