Allowed

Sanmugam v. The Sub Collector/ Revenue

Madras HC14 Jun 2019WP/16583/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the release of a vehicle seized for illegal sand transportation to the petitioner, contingent upon the deposit of a security sum, execution of a bond, and execution of an undertaking against future illegal use.

What did the court decide?

Directed release of the vehicle within 7 days once the petitioner complies with conditions including depositing Rs 25,000, executing a personal bond of Rs 10,000 with sureties, and giving an undertaki

Sanmugam Vs The Sub Collector/ Revenue — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 14.06.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶7

Writ Petition No.16583 of 2019

¶8

Sanmugam
S/o.Gopal ...Petitioner
Vs
1. The Sub Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Sub Collector,
Vellore, Vellore District.
2. The Assistant Director,
Department of Geology and Mining,
Mines and Minerals,
Vellore District.
3. The Tahsildar,
Gudiyatham,
Vellore District.
4. The Inspector of Police,
Gudiyatham Taluk Police Station,
Vellore District. ... Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent herein to release the vehicle namely Ashok Leyland Ltd Dost RLS BSIV a Van bearing Registration No.TN-01BC-3156 to the petitioner.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balaji
For Respondents : Mr.V.Shanmuga Sundar,
Special Government Pleader
O R D E R

¶11

[Order was delivered by R.SUBBIAH, J]

¶12

Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing respondents herein to release the Ashok Leyland Ltd Dost RLS BSIV a Van bearing

¶13

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

¶14

Registration No.TN-01-BC-3156, seized by the second respondent on 07.06.2019.

¶15

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for respondents.

¶16

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 07.06.2019 on the ground of illegal carrying of river sand and till date, no order for release of the said vehicle had been passed by respondents. Hence, he has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

¶17

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Government Pleader for respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of mines and minerals like river sand (1 unit) and hence, the vehicle was seized. He would further submit that petitioner has no previous case.

¶18

In any event, as the vehicle is under the custody of the respondents from the date of seizure and considering the fact that if the same is allowed to be kept idle by exposing the same to rain and shine, it would certainly diminish their value, this Court is of the view that the vehicle in question may be released by imposing conditions on the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, the respondents are directed to release the vehicle in question to the petitioner within a period of 7 days from the date of compliance of the below mentioned condition Nos.(i) to (iii):

¶20

(i)Petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) before the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned as non-refundable deposit. After receipt of the above said amount, the same will have to be deposited by the jurisdictional Tahsildar concerned, to the credit of the District Mines and Minerals Foundation Trust as non-refundable deposit.

¶21

(ii)Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned jurisdictional Judicial Magistrate.

¶22

(iii)Petitioner shall give an undertaking before the respondents/authority concerned stating that he will not use the vehicle in question for any illegal activities in future and shall produce the same as and when required by the respondents and also the trial Court, failing which the respondents/trial Court is/are at liberty to confiscate the vehicle.

¶23

(iv)Petitioner shall not alienate the vehicle in question till the disposal of the proceedings before the authority concerned.

¶24

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

¶25

(v)Petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶26

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

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(J)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

¶33

The Sub Collector/Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Sub Collector, Vellore, Vellore District.

¶34

The Assistant Director, Department of Geology and Mining, Mines and Minerals,

¶35

Vellore District.

¶36

The Tahsildar, Gudiyatham, Vellore District.

¶37

The Inspector of Police, Gudiyatham Taluk Police Station, Vellore District.

¶38

+2 ccs to Mr.D.Balaji, Advocate, S.R.No.48506

¶39

+1 cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.49446

¶40

Writ Petition No.16583 of 2019

¶41

SSM(26/06/2019).

¶42

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

Sanmugam v. The Sub Collector/ Revenue

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanmugam v. The Sub Collector/ Revenue

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

Prasanth Vs The District Revenue Officer

Unnamalai Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Elaiyaperumal Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

S.Selvakumar, Vs The District Revenue Officer

Arumugham Vs The Inspector of Police

Saraswathi Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer