Allowed

Iyyalusamy v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC1 Apr 2019WP(MD)/7609/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses applications filed by the petitioner regarding illegal transportation of sand. The vehicle was seized by authorities pending an ongoing enquiry. The petitioner was permitted to release the vehicle upon depositing a sum of Rs. 25,000/ with the District Mineral Foundation Trust. The petitioner must also provide an affidavit of undertaking not to commit future offences, submit ow

What did the court decide?

Release of the seized tractor and trailer to the petitioner subject to deposit of Rs. 25,000/ in the District Mineral Foundation Trust, execution of an undertaking affidavit, and submission of ownersh

Iyyalusamy Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01.04.2019 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.7609 of 2019

Iyyalusamy

... Petitioner

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶8

2.The Assistant Director,

¶9

Mines and Minerals Department, Tirunelveli District.

¶10

3.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil,

¶11

Tirunelveli District.

¶12

4.The Inspector of Police, K.V.Nallur Police Station, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to release the vehicle bearing Tractor.No.TN 72 A 0307 and Trailer No.TN 72 A 0308 to the petitioner forthwith.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Jayaramachandran For Respondents : Mr.M.Rajarajan Government Advocate

¶15

ORDER

¶16

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶17

2.By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶18

3.The petitioner's vehicle was seized in connection with illegal transportation of sand. The enquiry in this regard is still pending. The learned counsel for the petitioner affirms before this Court that the petitioner's vehicle was not involved in any previous incident of sand theft or illegal transportation of sand.

¶19

4.The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is placed on record. If this submission turns out to be false, the order now passed by this Court would stand automatically recalled https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and the petitioner will be visited with serious consequences. I am of the view that no purpose will be served by keeping the vehicle in

¶20

¶21

question in the custody of the respondents. If the vehicle is kept in open space and exposed to sun light and rain, it would lose its value. Therefore, the respondents are directed to release the said vehicle subject to the following conditions:-

¶22

a) The petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the concerned District Mineral Foundation Trust. He shall execute an affidavit of undertaking that he shall not involve in any offence in future that may lead to the seizure of the vehicle in question. The petitioner shall not alienate or encumber the vehicle in question till the proceedings are completed.

¶23

b) The petitioner shall produce all the documents pertaining to the ownership of the seized vehicle.

¶24

c) This order for release of the vehicle can be pressed into service by the petitioner only if the vehicle is not in the custody of the criminal Court. If the vehicle is in the custody of concerned Criminal Court of appropriate jurisdiction, then, option is given to the petitioner to approach the concerned Judicial Magistrate to get release of the vehicle, by filing necessary application in the manner known to law.

¶25

d) As and when the respondents call for the vehicle for enquiry, the petitioner has to produce the vehicle in question and he shall cooperate with the enquiry to be conducted by the respondents.

¶26

5.Upon completion of these formalities, the respondents shall release the vehicle forthwith without any delay. If this undertaking given by the petitioner is breached, the petitioner will not be entitled to interim release of the vehicle in future.

¶27

6.The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶28

Assistant Registrar (CS II) // True Copy //

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶30

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶32

¶33

2.The Assistant Director, Mines and Minerals Department, Tirunelveli District.

¶34

3.The Tahsildar, Sankarankovil, Tirunelveli District.

¶35

4.The Inspector of Police, K.V.Nallur Police Station, Tirunelveli District.

¶36

+1cc to Mr.A.JAYARAMACHANDRAN, Advocate, SR.No. 58049 +1cc to M/s.Special Government Pleader,SR.No. 58330

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.7609 of 2019

¶38

MM KK/SAR/05.04.2019/ 3P- 7C

¶39

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

Iyyalusamy v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Iyyalusamy 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

Karuppusamy, Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Vijaya Shankari Vs the Executive Officer

S.Alagarsamy, Vs the Passport Officer

Rahman, Vs the Director of Collegiate

K.Arumugam, Vs the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance

K.Alagarsamy, Vs the Branch Manager