Disposed

Sujin, v. the Distirict Collector

Madras HC26 Nov 2018WP(MD)/23360/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to release a seized lorry used for alleged illegal sand transportation. The court ordered release within 7 days subject to producing ownership documents, depositing a Rs.50,000 refundable deposit, giving an undertaking against future illegal use, restricting alienation, and participating in the enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Directed release of the seized lorry to the petitioner within 7 days of receiving a copy of the order, subject to producing ownership documents, depositing Rs.50,000, undertaking against illegal use,

Sujin, Vs the Distirict Collector — Madras HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Sujin

¶3

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 26.11.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN W.P(MD)No.23360 of 2018

¶6

Sujin ..Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The District Collector, Virudhunagar District.

¶9

The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals, Virudhunagar District.

¶10

The Revenue Divisional Officer,

¶11

Aruppukottai,

¶12

Virudhunagar District.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Virudhunagar District.

¶14

The Inspector of Police, Kulakarai Police Station, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the fifth respondents to release the petitioner's Tarash lorry bearing Registration No.TN58 X 2034 which was seized by him on 22.09.2018 at Virudhunagar Tollgate, Virudhunagar District and entrust the same to the petitioner.

¶16

For Petitioner :Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents :Mr.J.Padmavathy Devi 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 Tarash lorry bearing Registration No.TN58 X 2034.

¶19

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

¶20

According to the petitioner, the official respondent has https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ seized the vehicle in question on the ground that it was involved in transportation of illegal river sand without any valid permit

¶21

¶22

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 Government Advocate appearing for the respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of river 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 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:

¶26

“(i) The petitioner shall produce necessary

¶27

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 third 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 respondents.”

¶33

However, it is made clear that if the vehicle involves in the crime for second time, the concerned respondent shall not release the vehicle.

¶34

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

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶37

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

¶38

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶39

¶40

¶41

The District Collector, Virudhunagar District. 2. The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals, Virudhunagar District. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District. 4. The Tahsildar, Virudhunagar District. 5. The Inspector of Police, Kulakarai Police Station, Virudhunagar District. +1cc to Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian ,Advocate Sr.No.96871 +1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.97052

¶42

PNN

¶43

VB/PM/SAR4/29.11.2018/3P/8C

¶44

W.P(MD)No.23360 of 2018 26.11.2018

¶45

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

Sujin, v. the Distirict Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujin, v. the Distirict Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Kannan, Contractor Vs the Tender Inviting

N. Kannan, Vs the Tender Inviting Authority

J.Celin Pragasi Vs the Superintendending Engineer

Kanagaraj, Vs the Assistant Director

Muthu, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

K.Asokan Vs the Commissioner of Land