Allowed

Orsu Sreenivasa Rao v. The State of Andha Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Apr 2023WP/9022/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that while the issuance of a Vehicle Check Report (VCR) was lawful due to failure to transfer ownership and pay tax, seizing the vehicle without a prior show-cause notice violated natural justice. The Court ordered the immediate release of the vehicle and directed respondents to issue a show-cause notice for tax payment.

What did the court decide?

Vehicle bearing No.DL8CAH6007 directed to be released immediately by 5.00 p.m.; respondents directed to issue show-cause notice for road tax payment.

Orsu Sreenivasa Rao Vs The State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.9022 of 2023

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

The present Writ Petition came to be filed under Article

¶5

226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

¶6

“…to issue Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3^rd respondent in seizing the vehicle bearing No.DL8CAH6007 vide his Vehicle Check Report (VCR) No.AP016/Mar2023/031660, dated 28.03.2023 as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Motor Vehicle Act and Rules apart from violation of Art.21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle bearing No.DL8CAH6007 forthwith and to pass….”

¶7

The case of the petitioner is that, he purchased a second hand Car bearing No.DL8CAH6007 from a registered owner at Delhi to cater his needs in attending the Courts being an Advocate. Thereafter, immediately he also obtained NOC to transfer the vehicle in his favour on 23.11.2022 and he brought the vehicle to Andhra Pradesh. While the matter being so, on 28.03.2023, while he was proceeding to Mangalagiri Court after attending his Court work at Vijayawada, the vehicle was stopped by the 3^rd respondent near Krishnalanka flyover and the 3^rd respondent demanded

¶8

¶9

the petitioner to pay the Road Tax of Rs.1,13,100/- and compounding fee of Rs.100/-, totaling an amount of Rs.1,13,200/-, failing which, the vehicle would be seized and a VCR No.AP016/Mar2023/031660, dated 28.03.2023 has been issued and since the petitioner was not in a position to pay the said amount demanded by the 3^rd respondent on the spot, the vehicle was seized immediately even without giving prior notice to the petitioner. Challenging which, the present writ petition is filed.

¶10

Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader for Transport produced a copy of instructions of the 2^nd respondent dated 13.04.2023, wherein it is stated that the petitioner is using the vehicle without applying for transfer of ownership and without payment of Motor vehicles tax. Hence, the 3^rd respondent has booked a case while the said vehicle is proceeding to Vijayawada from Mylavaram, Andhra Pradesh and the petitioner is liable to pay motor vehicle tax as per sixth schedule under 4^th & 5^th proviso to subsection 2 of section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963.

¶11

¶12

Further stated that as per Section 50 (1) (b) of M.V. Act 1988 the transferee shall, within thirty days of the transfer, report the transfer to the registering authority within whose jurisdiction he has the residence or place of business where the vehicle is normally kept, as the case may be, and shall forward the certificate of registration to that registering authority together with the prescribed fee and a copy of the report received by him from the transferor in order that particulars of the transfer of ownership may be entered in the certificate of registration.

¶13

But in the present case, though the petitioner has obtained No Objection Certificate on 23.11.2022 by the Transport Department of GNCT Delhi, WAZIRPUR, the petitioner has not applied for transfer of ownership within the stipulated period as contemplated under Section 50 (1) (b) of M.V. Act, 1988 and as such the 3^rd respondent has raised VCR against the said vehicle, which is neither illegal nor arbitrary.

¶14

However, in view of the facts stated by the petitioner, it appears that the 3^rd respondent in an highhanded manner choose to seize the vehicle without even giving any prior

¶15

¶16

show-cause notice calling for his explanation, which is admittedly in violation of the principles of natural justice, illegal and arbitrary.

¶17

In view of the same, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to release the vehicle immediately today by 5.00 p.m. itself and thereafter issue show-cause notice calling for explanation from the petitioner for payment of road tax, if any due by the petitioner and after receiving such explanation submitted by the petitioner, the respondents are directed to pass appropriate order thereon, in accordance with law.

¶18

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶19

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶20

Date : 13.04.2023

¶21

_______________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶22

Note: CC by today B/o KGR

¶23

¶24

¶25

HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.9022 of 2023

¶27

Date : 13.04.2023

¶28

KGR

Orsu Sreenivasa Rao v. The State of Andha Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Orsu Sreenivasa Rao v. The State of Andha Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Maruthi Marine Services, Vs The State of A.P.

Smt.Potnuri Sri Devi, Vs The Union of India

A.P. Grampanchayat Employees and Vs The State of A.P.

Pullela Sathya Ramalinga Sastry, S/o Subrahmanya Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

J. Srinivasulu S/o J. Kalaiah, Vs Syndicate Bank