Allowed

M.Vijayalakshmi v. Govt of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC15 Mar 2019WP/7387/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the seizure of a lorry by police alleging illegal carrying of pebble. The Court directed the release of the vehicle within seven days upon the petitioner fulfilling conditions including depositing a sum, executing a bond with sureties, giving an undertaking against future illegal use, and participating in an enquiry.

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized lorry by the respondents within seven days conditioned upon depositing Rs.10,000, executing a bond with sureties, and undertaking against future illegal use.

M.Vijayalakshmi Vs Govt of Tamil Nadu — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 15.03.2019

¶2

Coram
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice R.Subbiah
and
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Writ Petition No.7387 of 2019
M.Vijayalakshmi ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Cuddalore District.
2.The Deputy Director,
Department of Geology and Mines,
Taluk Office Campus,
Cuddalore 607 001.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Kadampuliyur Police Station,
Cuddalore District. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus,
directing the third respondent to release the Lorry bearing
Registration No.TN 31 AJ 2799, which was seized on 16.02.2019 by
the third respondent.

¶3

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Abdul Samath For Respondents: Mr.J.Pothiraj, Special Government Pleader ***** O R D E R [Order was delivered by R.SUBBIAH,J]

¶4

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to release the Lorry bearing Registration No.TN 31 AJ 2799, which was seized on 16.02.2019 by the third respondent.

¶5

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

¶6

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

¶7

According to the petitioner, the respondents have seized the vehicle in question on 16.02.2019 on the ground of illegal carrying of Pebble, 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.

¶8

On the other hand, it is submitted by learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents that the vehicle in question was used for illegal transportation of mines and minerals like Pebble and there is no valid permit and hence, the vehicle was seized.

¶9

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.

¶10

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:

¶11

(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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

With the above observations and directions, this Writ

¶18

Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vkr
To
1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Cuddalore District.
2.The Deputy Director,
Department of Geology and Mines,
Taluk Office Campus,
Cuddalore 607 001.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Kadampuliyur Police Station,
Cuddalore District.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.25082
+1cc to Mr.B.Abdul Samath, Advocate, S.R.No.24647
Writ Petition No.7387 of 2019
KAN(CO)
rrs 22/03/2019

¶20

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

M.Vijayalakshmi v. Govt of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Vijayalakshmi v. Govt of Tamil Nadu

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

P.Parimala Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

R.Kalpana Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

C.Loganathan Vs The Collector

Geetha Matric Hr. Sec. School, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Raja Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

J.Senthilkumar Vs State Rep by