V Seetha Ramanjaneyulu Vs the State of Ap

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fliep therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd

¶18

Respondent in seizing the Van bearing No. AP39WA2678 of the 1st Petitioner, the Tata Hitachi 200LC of the 2nd Petitioner and Jai Durgabhavani named Boat of the 3RD Petitioner in connection^with FIR No.51 of 2025 without following the procedure known to the law under '^PMMC Rules, 1966 as illegal, irregular, arbitrary and contrary to the procedure established by law and against to the principles of natural justice and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed^{underArticles14,21} and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the above said vehicles of the Petitioners forthwith in the interest of justice.

¶19

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to release the Van bearing No. AP39WA2678 of the 1st Petitioner, the Tata Hitachi 200LC of the 2nd Petitioner and Jai Durgabhavani named Boat of the 3rd Petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition in the interest of justice.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. B JAVA PRABHAKARA RAO

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1: GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: GP FOR HOME

¶25

The Court made the following order:

PIP

w

APHC010152252025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3458] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶30

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶31

PRESENT

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 7750 of 2025

¶33

Between:

¶34

V Seetha Ramanjaneyulu and others ...Petitioners AND The State of AP and others ...Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: B Jaya Prabhakara Rao Counsel for the Respondents: GP for Home GP for Revenue GP for Mines and Geology

¶35

The Court made the following order:

¶36

The writ petition is filed challenging the action of the S""* respondent in seizing the Van bearing No.AP 39 WA 2678 belonging to the 1®‘ petitioner, the Tata Hitachi Vehicle 200LC belonging to the 2"'^ petitioner and a boat by name Jai Durgabhavani belonging to the petitioner in connection^withFIRNo.51 of 2025, without following the procedure under the^{AndhraPradeshMinor} Mineral Concession Rules, 1966.

¶37

Heard Sri B.Jaya Prabhakara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents. With the consent of both the parties, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.

¶38

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have been using the subject vehicles for commercial purposes.^{Whenthevehicles} were at Vegeswarapuram Village, Tallapudi Mandal, East^{GodavariDistrict,} the 3'^^ respondent herein has seized the vehicles alleging that the petitioners have been transporting sand without valid documents.

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3'^^ respondent has illegally seized the vehicles of the petitioners and registered FIR No.51 of 2025 under Section 303(2) read with 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, 23(C)(1) Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Hence, he prays the Court to direct the respondents^{toreleasethevehicles.In} support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners relies on a decision of this Court in W.P.No.5213 of 2025, prays the Court to dispose of the Writ Petition in terms of the said order. He further relies on G.O.Ms.No.43 dated 08.07.2024.

¶40

The relevant clauses of Clause 6(lll)(Q)(i) of the^{saidG.O.Ms.No.43} Industries and Commerce (Mines-lll), Department, dated 08.07.2024, reads as follows:

¶41

Q. Offences and Penalties:

¶42

i. In case of the vehicles engaged in illegal/ un-authorized excavation in the prohibited areas (i.e., within 500^{metersfromthe} Ground water structures, Bridges, Dams, Railway lines and cross drainage structures etc.), transportation^{ofsandoutside} the State and found transporting sand without valid Sand Way bill /invoice shall be penalized as follows;

¶43

Vehicle Type	First Time (In Rs.)	Second Time (In Rs.)
Tractor	UptoJ0,000/-	Rs.10,001/-to 20,000/-
Lorry fitted with upto 10 tires capacity	Upto 25,000/-	Rs.25,001/- to 50,000/-
Lorry fitted with above 10 tires	Upto 50,000/-	Rs.50,001/- to 1,00,000/-
Machinery	Upto 50,000/-	Rs.50,001/- to 1,00,000/-

¶44

Thus he argues that the authorities cannot seize the^{vehicleforanyalleged} violations, they could, at the best levy only penalties.

¶45

Considering the submissions of both the learned^{counselandupon} perusing the material on record, the Writ Petition^{isdisposedofintermsofthe} order passed in W.P.No.5213 of 2025, dated 03.03.2025 directing the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in terms of clause 6(lll)(Q)(i), of G.O.Ms.No.43, Industries and Commerce (Mines-lll), Department, dated 08.07.2024, for levying penalty if any.^{Afterlevyofpenalty,} and on payment of such penalty, the seized vehicles^{shallbereleasedbythe} 3"'^ respondent on producing of the receipt of such payment and ownership documents of the vehicles to the satisfaction of the 3'^^ respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶46

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶47

//TRUE COPY//

¶48

SDI- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT iREGISTRAR SECrnON OFFICER

¶49

To,

¶50