Disposed

Selvam v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC14 Mar 2019WP/7443/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the release of the petitioner's lorry seized for alleged illegal mineral transportation. The Court imposed conditions including a non-refundable deposit, a personal bond with sureties, an undertaking against future illegal use, and participation in the authority's enquiry before dismissing the cross-production petition.

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized lorry within seven days subject to deposit of Rs.50,000, execution of a bond with sureties, and undertaking against illegal use.

Selvam Vs The District Revenue Officer — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated : 14.03.2019

¶3

Coram:

¶4

The Honourable Mr. Justice R.SUBBIAH and The Honourable Mr. Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶5

W.P.No.7443 of 2019

¶6

Selvam ...Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Avadi Taluk,
Thiruvallur District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Thirumullaivoyal Police Station,
Thiruvallur District.
...Respondents

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the lorry of the petitioner bearing Registration No.TN-20-AM-1053 (TATA-goods carrier), seized by the respondents on 25.01.2019 to the petitioner forthwith based on the representation of the petitioner dated 11.03.2019.

¶8

The petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the petitioner's Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-20-AM1053 (TATA-goods carrier).

¶9

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

¶10

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

¶11

According to the petitioner, the respondents had seized the vehicle in question on 25.01.2019 on the ground of illegal carrying of 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.

¶12

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

¶13

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 conditions on the petitioner.

¶14

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):

¶15

(i)The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty 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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

¶22

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
mrr
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Avadi Taluk,
Thiruvallur District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Thirumullaivoyal Police Station,
Thiruvallur District.

¶23

+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.24672 +1cc to Mr.M.Vinoth, Advocate Sr.24088

¶24

W.P.No.7443 of 2019

¶25

srg 20/03/2019

¶26

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

Selvam v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Selvam v. The District Revenue Officer

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

S.Dilli Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

K.Deepa Vs The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officer

J.Deivasigamani, Vs The Sub Collector/ Revenue Divisional Officer

Sri Mahalakshmi Aqua Products Vs The Chairman, Tamil Nadu

V.Gomathi, D/o.G.Velkumar, Vs The State of TamilNadu

K.Balamurugan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer