IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI ANIL R. DAVE, THE CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 3153 of 2009 Between: A. Sattaiah S/o. Chandraiah R/o. H.No. 1-21, G. Chennaram, Kanagal (M) Nalgonda District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. 2 The Motor Vehicle Inspector R.T.A. Nalgonda, Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the petitioner vehicle bearing No. AP 07U-3606/3607 on 4-2-2009 vide V.C.R. No. 1942380 by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, illegal, and further direct the Respondents to release the said vehicle to the petitioner pending enquiry and pass such other order or orders Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.VENKATA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER: (per Sri Anil R. Dave, CJ) The petitioner has been aggrieved by the seizure of his Tractor and Trailor bearing Registration No. AP.07U-3606/3607. It has been submitted that the said Tractor has been wrongly seized by the respondent-authority and though an application for return of the Tractor has been submitted on 13-2-2009, no action has been taken in pursuance of the said application. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent- authority has submitted that the application of the petitioner dated 13-2- 2009 is under active consideration by the respondents and the said application is likely to be decided within a day or two. In view of the above statement made by the learned Government Pleader and in view of the fact that the application submitted by the petitioner is under active consideration, we are not inclined to entertain this petition. We are sure that the application dated 13-2-2009 shall be decided as soon as possible and preferably before 20-2-2009. The petition is rejected subject to the above observation. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ______________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 18th February, 2009. Note: Furnish copy by tomorrow. /B.O/ GRR