Disposed

Rengarajan, v. the District Collector

Madras HC19 Nov 2018WP(MD)/22970/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging police custody of a vehicle seized for alleged illegal sand transportation. The court directed release of the vehicle within seven days subject to proof of ownership, a non-refundable deposit, undertaking against future illegal use, and participation in inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Vehicle released to petitioner within 7 days subject to conditions: proof of ownership, Rs. 50,000 deposit, undertaking against illegal use, and participation in enquiry.

Rengarajan, Vs the District Collector — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED 19.11.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.22970 of 2018

Rengarajan

..Petitioner

1.The District Collector, Pudukottai District.

¶11

2.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals, Pudukottai.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Illuppur Taluk Pudukottai District.

¶13

4.The Inspector of Police, Annavasal Police Station, Annavasal, Pudukottai District. ..Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the Petitioner's Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No. TN-55 T-5332 and entrust the same to the petitioner.

¶15

For Petitioner :Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian

¶16

For Respondent :Mrs.J.Padmavathy Special Government Pleader

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to release the petitioner's vehicle ie., Tipper Lorry bearing Registration No. TN-55 T 5332.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. According to the petitioner, the official respondent has seized the vehicle in question on the ground that it was involved in

¶21

¶22

transportation of illegal sand without any valid permit and the vehicle is still under the police custody. Hence, this Writ Petition is filed.

¶23

On the other hand, it is submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of sand without any valid permit and hence, it was seized.

¶24

In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the official respondent from the date of seizing and considering the fact that if the same is allowed to be kept idle by exposing the same to sun and rain, it would certainly diminish its value. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the vehicle may be released by imposing conditions on the petitioner for release of the same.

¶25

Accordingly, the concerned respondent is directed to release

¶26

the vehicle in question to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order subject to the following conditions:

¶27

“(i) The petitioner shall produce necessary documents before the concerned respondent to establish the ownership of the vehicle in question;

¶28

(ii) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only), before the respondent as non refundable deposit;

¶29

(iii) The petitioner shall give an undertaking that he will not use the vehicle for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as and when required by the respondents;

¶30

(iv) On doing so, the vehicle in question shall be returned to the petitioner;

¶31

(v) The petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in question till the disposal of the proceedings before the authority concerned; and

¶32

(vi) The petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondent authorities.”

¶33

With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶34

Sd/Assistant Registrar(Co)

¶35

/True Copy/

¶36

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

1.The District Collector, Pudukottai District.

¶42

2.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals, Pudukottai.

¶43

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Illuppur Taluk Pudukottai District.

¶44

4.The Inspector of Police, Annavasal Police Station, Annavasal, Pudukottai District.

¶45

1 CC TO Mr.P.GANAPATHI SUBRAMANIAN , ADVOCATE IN SR No.95943.

¶46

+1 cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.96030.

¶47

DS RP SAR1 22 11 2018 3P 7C

¶48

W.P(MD)No.22970 of 2018

¶49

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Rengarajan, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rengarajan, v. the District Collector

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

Mr.R.Pongalaban Vs the Regional Passport Officer

Ajimon, Vs the District Revenue Officer

Dhanalakshmi, Vs the Chairman/

L.S.Mills Limited Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Sevugan, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M. Karuppasamy, Vs the District Collector