Boppana Nandini, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS AT VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-522237.

¶13

THE TAHSILDAR, CHINTALAPUDI MANDAL, ELURU DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH- 534460.

¶14

THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHINTALAPUDI POLICE STATION, ELURU DISTRICT ANDHRA PRADESH-534460.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in seizing the Lorry bearing No. AP 39 WH 1134 of the petitioner without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the procedure contemplated under the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957., and the rules made there under apart from being violation of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A

¶17

2

¶18

of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner from their custody

¶19

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

¶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 pleased to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to grant interim custody the Lorry bearing No.AP39 WH 1134 of the petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶22

1.V SAI KUMAR

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶24

1.GP FOR HOME

¶25

2.GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

3

¶28

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 19051 of 2026

¶30

ORDER:-

¶31

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of the India

¶32

seeking the following reliefs:-

¶33

“to issue an appropriate order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the Lorry bearing No.AP 39 WH 1134 of the petitioner without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the procedure contemplated under the A.P. Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 and provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957., and the rules made there under apart from being violation of Article 14, 19(1)(g) and 300-A of Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle of the petitioner from their custody and pass such other order or orders...”

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology for the respondent No.1, learned Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent No.2 and learned Government Pleader for Home for respondent No.3.

¶35

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein is the owner of the Lorry bearing No.AP 39 WH 1134 and he has been using the subject vehicle for transportation purpose only. While so, on 05.07.2026, the respondent No.3 herein has seized the vehicle alleging that the petitioner has been transporting the sand without valid documents.

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submit that the respondent No.3 has illegally seized the vehicle of the petitioner and registered FIR

¶37

4

¶38

No.177 of 2026 under Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 21(1) of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. Hence, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that this Hon’ble Court may direct the respondents to release the vehicle. In support of his contentions, the

¶39

learned counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision of this Court in W.P.No.35886 of 2025 and prayed this Court to dispose of this Writ Petition in terms of the said order. He also relies on G.O.Ms.No.100, dated 26.06.2025.

¶40

The Rule 9B-(19) of the said G.O.Ms.No.100 Industries and Commerce (Mines-II), Department, dated 26.06.2025, reads as follows:

¶41

“ Rule 9-B

¶42

XXX

¶43

(19). Offences and Penalties:

¶44

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

¶45

*Vehicle Type*	*First Time (In Rs.)*	*Second Time (In Rs.)*
Tractor	Upto 10,000/-	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/-

¶46

Thus, he argues that the authorities cannot seize the vehicle for any

¶47

alleged violations, they could, at the best levy only penalties.

¶48

5

¶49

On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines

¶50

and Geology appearing for respondent No.1 did not refute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner since the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by an earlier decision of this Court.

¶51

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai Vs. State of Gujarat¹ , observed that merely keeping vehicles would not serve any fruitful purpose.

¶52

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for all the parties and on perusal of the material placed on record, in view of the earlier orders passed by this Court and with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, this Court is inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition at the stage of admission.

¶53

Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in terms of Rule 9B-(19) of G.O.Ms.No.100, Industries and Commerce (Mines-III), Department, dated 26.06.2025, for levying penalty if any. After levy of penalty and on payment of such penalty, the seized vehicle bearing No.AP 39 WH 1134 shall be released to the petitioner by the 3^rd respondent on producing the receipt of such payment and ownership documents of the vehicle to the satisfaction of the 3^rd respondent. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶54