Disposed

M.Gokila v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC25 Mar 2019WP/7058/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the High Court directed the respondents to release a seized tractor belonging to the petitioner for illegal mining activities, subject to the payment of a deposit, execution of a bond, and an undertaking not to use the vehicle for illegal purposes.

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized tractor within 7 days upon compliance of deposit, bond, and undertaking conditions.

M.Gokila Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 25.03.2019

¶3

Coram

¶4

The Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.Subbiah and The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy

¶5

Writ Petition No.7058 of 2019

¶6

M.Gokila ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Ponneri,
Thiruvallur District.
2. The Tahsildar,
Gumudipoondi,
Thiruvallur District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Kavarapettai Police Station,
Thiruvallur District. ...Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner Tractor bearing Registration No. TN-18-AH-0588 which was seized on 02.10.2018, by the 2^nd respondent and subsequently handed over to the 3^rd respondent herein.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.U.Aslam For Respondents: Mr.D.Raghu Government Advocate.

¶9

O R D E R [Order was delivered by R.SUBBIAH,J]

¶10

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner Tractor bearing Registration No.TN-18-AH0588 which was seized on 02.10.2018, by the 2^nd respondent and subsequently handed over to the 3^rd respondent herein.

¶11

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

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

¶13

According to the petitioner, the respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 02.10.2018 on the ground of illegal carrying of river sand, and till date, no order for release of the said vehicle had been passed by the respondents. Hence, he has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

¶14

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Government Advocate for the respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of mines and minerals like river sand and there is no valid permit and hence, the vehicle was seized. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous case.

¶15

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 sun, it would certainly diminish their value, this Court is of the view that the vehicle in question may be released by imposing certain conditions on the petitioner.

¶16

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 condition Nos.(i) to (iii), which are mentioned below:

¶17

(i)The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten 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.

¶18

(ii)The 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.

¶19

(iii)The 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.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

The petitioner is also directed to participate in the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶23

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

¶24

-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-I)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
1. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Ponneri,
Thiruvallur District.
2. The Tahsildar,
Gumudipoondi,
Thiruvallur District.
3. The Inspector of Police,
Kavarapettai Police Station,
Thiruvallur District.
+1 CC to Mr.U.Aslam, Advocate sr 27834.
+1 CC to Government Pleader sr 29198.
Writ Petition No.7058 of 2019
RSV(CO)
SP(02/04/2019)

¶25

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

M.Gokila v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Gokila v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

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

P.Maheswari Vs The Collector

Senthilkumar Vs The Assistant Director

Nithyanandam Vs The Assistant Director

Ashok Anand Vs The Secretary

Srinivasan Vs The District Collector

Muthusamy Vs The State Rep. by