IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI A N D THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 22361 of 2008 Between: T.Ajaya Babu S/o.Dasaradha Ramaiah R/o. D.No.21-1-33, Vijaya Garden, Bundlaguda, Nagole, Ranga Reddy District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Assistant Secretary ( Regional Transport Officer), Regional Transport Authority, Uppal, Ranga Reddy Dist. 2 The Motor Vehicles Inspector, Vijayawada, Krishna 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 to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the seizure and detention of petitioner's contract carriage vehicle bearing R.No. AP 29T 6868 seized under vehicle check report No. 0067057 dt. 1-10-2008 by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, malaﬁde, illegal, improper, void, vitiated, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction, contrary to the mandatory provisions of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and violative of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court reported in 2000 (4) ALD 501 and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle, forthwith to the petitioner and grant such other necessary relief or reliefs. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. RAJANIKANTH JWALA Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Division Bench of this Court made the following oral order: (Oral Order follows 2nd page) THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI A N D THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 22361 of 2008 ORAL ORDER : [ Per the Hon’ble Mrs.Justice T. Meena Kumari ] The writ petition is ﬁled for a writ of Mandamus to declare the seizure and detention of petitioner's contract carriage vehicle bearing Regdn.No. AP 29T 6868 seized under vehicle check report No. 0067057 dated 1-10-2008 by the 2nd respondent as arbitrary, malaﬁde, illegal, improper, void, vitiated, unconstitutional, without jurisdiction, contrary to the mandatory provisions of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 and consequently to direct the respondents to release the vehicle, forthwith to the petitioner and grant such other necessary relief or reliefs as this Court may deem ﬁt and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows: It is stated that the petitioner is the registered owner of contract carriage vehicle bearing Regdn.No. AP- 29-T 6868. The said vehicle is having a seating capacity of 42 in all and covered by valid registration, insurance certiﬁcate upto 25-5-2009, valid pollution under control certiﬁcate upto 23-11-2008, valid ﬁtness certiﬁcate (Form No.38) upto 07-8-2009, valid Regular District Wide Contract Carriage Permit No.APO-29/1208/PC/2007 upto 11- 11-2012 and authorized to ply in the entire district of Ranga Reddy district besides valid payment of prescribed tax upto the period Q.E. 30-9-2008. In respect of payment of prescribed tax for the period Q.E. 31-12-2008, the grace period is available upto the period 31-10-2008. Further it is stated that in the month of September 2008, the vehicle came up for major engine repairs and body repairs. On 01-10-2008 when the empty vehicle was being taken to the workshop at Autonagar, Vijayawada in Krishna district for the purpose of carrying out major engine repairs and body repairs, on intimation of stoppage (non-use) report together with the original documents of the vehicle to the ﬁrst respondent registering authority on the same day as contemplated under Rule 12-A of AP Motor Vehicles Rules 1989, in view of the official holiday declared to the oﬃce of the ﬁrst respondent on 30-9-2008, due to demise of a political leader at Hyderabad. Enroute, when the empty vehicle reached outskirts of Vijayawada at about 06:30 p.m., the second respondent stopped and checked the vehicle at Ibrahimpatnam. On demand, all the photocopies of documents of the vehicle are shown to the second respondent by the driver of the vehicle. The driver also explained the second respondent checking oﬃcer regarding the purpose of carrying empty vehicle to the workshop at Autonagar, Vijayawada for carrying out repairs. The second respondent even though satisﬁed about the validity of the documents of the vehicle and the purpose of carrying the empty vehicle informed the driver that he is seizing the vehicle for statistical purposes and to reach the targets ﬁxed by the higher oﬃcials. Thereupon the second respondent prepared vehicle check report no. 0067057 dated 01-10-2008 falsely alleging that the vehicle was stopped and checked while proceeding from Hyderabad to Eluru carrying passengers and plying as express stage carriage without valid documents and payment of tax for the period Q.E. 31-12-2008. The vehicle is covered by all valid documents and payment of tax in respect of payment of prescribed tax for the period Q.E. 31-12-2008, grace period is available upto the period 31-10-2008. It is stated that immediately after the seizure and detention of the vehicle, the petitioner approached the ﬁrst respondent and narrated all the facts and circumstances and requested to release the vehicle. On 04-10-2008 a representation was submitted to the ﬁrst respondent seeking release of his vehicle along with Photostat copies of the documents of the vehicle and also demand draft bearing No. 597603 dated 03-10-2008 as contemplated under section 207 (2) of Motor Vehicles Act 1988 read with rule 448 (A) and (B) of AP Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. But the ﬁrst respondent refused to release the vehicle and informed that the vehicle would not be released except under court orders and refused to give any written endorsement. Since then the vehicle is not released and continued to be kept under detention. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Transport takes notice and strenuously submitted that when the respondent oﬃcials stopped and checked the vehicle in question while it was proceeding from Hyderabad to Eluru, it was found that the driver of the vehicle was carrying 36 adult passengers excluding himself. On enquiry with the passengers, it has come to light that two passengers are traveling from Hyderabad to Vijayawada by paying Rs.250/- each individually and 34 passengers are traveling from Hyderabad to Eluru by paying Rs.300/- each. There is no prior contract either expressed or implied between driver/owner to any body else traveling for their diﬀerence purpose and on their own accord. The passengers traveling do not constitute homogenous group thus found plying the vehicle in question as express stage carriage between Hyderabad and Eluru by collecting fares individually without proper tax for Q.E. 31-12-2008 and permit. Further the registration certiﬁcate, ﬁtness certiﬁcate, permit, insurance certiﬁcate, tax receipt for Q.E. 30-9-2008 and PUC certiﬁcate were not produced. Therefore, the learned Govt.Pleader denied the averments made by the petitioner in his aﬃdavit and the action of the respondents in seizing of the vehicle under section 8 of the AP Motor Vehicles Act and also detaining the vehicle under section 207 of Motor Vehicles Act and kept at FC testing station, Gannavaram, is valid and justifiable. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Transport, it is suﬃce that if a direction is given to the respondents to release the vehicle in question i.e., AP-29T- 6868 subject to payment of payment of tax of Rs.36,620/- within a period of four weeks from today. 5. According to the counsel for the petitioner the said amount has been disputed by the learned Government Pleader for Transport and the learned Government Pleader for Transport submitted that the petitioner has to pay the tax of Rs.1,15,000-00. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the diﬀerence of tax will be subject to the result of enquiry. 6. In view of the above contentions and having regard to the fact that enquiry is pending, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition at the stage of admission with a direction to the respondents to release the vehicle bearing Regdn.No.AP-29T-6868 seized under check report No. 0067057, dated 01-10-2008 subject to the condition of payment of Rs.36,620-00 of the tax and on 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 said vehicle as and when required by the respondents. It is also made clear that the amount paid pursuant to this order, shall be subject to the result of the enquiry. 7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. ------------------------------------- JUSTICE T. MEENA KUMARI. --------------------------------------------- -- JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN. 16-10-2008. I s L N B : 1) Operative Portion of the order by wire at party’s costs. 2) Furnish CC of the order tomorrow. B/o. I s L . REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{KURR}