The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking the release of a seized bicycle. The Court held the W.P. infructuous as a final order dated 03.04.2020 was passed under Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act, 1937.
Petition dismissed as infructuous; liberty granted to challenge the final order dated 03.04.2020.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD)No.14283 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.10.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD)No.14283 of 2020
Ganesan
: Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District.
4.The Inspector of Police, PEW-Ramanathapuram Police Station, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District. : Respondents
PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent to release the petitioner's Bike bearing Reg.No.TN-65-AH-4523 seized by the 3rd respondent on 17.12.2019.
For Petitioner :Mr.K.Gokul For Respondents :Mrs.V.P.M.Vaishnavi Government Advocate
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus seeking for a direction to direct the 3rd respondent to release the petitioner's Bike bearing Reg.No.TN-65-AH-4523 seized by the 3rd respondent on 17.12.2019.
2.Heard Mr.K.Gokul, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.V.P.M.Vaishnavi, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents.
3.The learned Government Advocate has produced a copy of the final order, dated 03.04.2020 passed under Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act 1937. She would further submit that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
1/2
W.P.(MD)No.14283 of 2020
since final orders have been passed, the only remedy now available to the petitioner is to challenge the said final order.
4.In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has sought for release of his Bike bearing Registration No.TN-65-AH-4523, which was seized by the 3rd respondent under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act 1937. Since final orders have already been passed under Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act 1937, the Writ Petition has now become infructuous. A copy of the final order dated 03.04.2020 has been sent to the learned Counsel for the petitioner by the learned Government Advocate.
5.After recording the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents as well as after perusing the final order passed under Section 14(4) of Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act 1937, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructous. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to challenge the final order, dated 03.04.2020 in accordance with law. However, there is no order as to costs.
// True Copy //
/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
Cmr
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Inspector of Police, Town Police Station, Rameswaram, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Inspector of Police, PEW-Ramanathapuram Police Station, Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
Order made in W.P.(MD)No.14283 of 2020 15.10.2020
DKS(CO) NR (02/11/2020) 2P : 4C
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition for release of a seized vehicle is maintainable after the passing of a final order?
Whether the petitioner has a remedy by challenging the final order passed under Section 14(4) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition Act?
2 provisions across 2 enactments
GANESAN
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, RAMANATHAPURAM
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TOWN POLICE STATION, RAMESWARAM
THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PEW-RAMANATHAPURAM POLICE STATION
ABDUL QUDDHOSE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
