Disposed

Mr. Md. Kaleem, v. The Registering Authority

Telangana HC13 Aug 2004WP/14350/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for the release of a vehicle seized by the Motor Vehicle Inspector due to missing documents and lack of permit. The Court directed the Registering Authority to production of relevant documents and hearing the petitioner before passing appropriate orders, subsequently disposing of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to produce relevant documents, hear the petitioner, and pass appropriate orders according to law.

Mr. Md. Kaleem, Vs The Registering Authority — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2004)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G.YETHIRAJULU

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO : 14350 of 2004

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr. Md. Kaleem, S/o. Md. Ibrahim, Muslim, R/o.1-4-47/A, Bowenpally, INA, Secunderabad.

¶9

..... PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The Registering Authority,

¶12

Transport Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh,

¶13

Secunderabad. 2 The Motor Vehicle Inspector,

¶14

R.T.A., Hyderabad.

¶15

.....RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ or direction or an order more particularly in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the second respondent in seizing the vehicle bearing No. AHT-8592 as arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and consequently release the vehicle bearing No.AHT-8592, seized under the check report No. 2603669 dated 15-7-2004, which is standing in the name of the petitioner is bad-in-law.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATESWARLU POTHAPRAGADA

¶18

Counsel for the Respondents1 & 2: G.P. FOR TRANSPORT

¶19

The Court made the following:

¶20

W.P.No.14350 of 2004

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, which was seized by the second respondent after making a check on 15-07-2004 and a check report was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner’s counsel represents that the petitioner approached the first respondent and made an oral request for release of the vehicle, but the first respondent did not release the vehicle. Therefore, he approached this Court seeking a direction to the first respondent to release the vehicle. The allegation is that the vehicle is more than 15 years old. No permit is in force as on the date of check and he failed to produce the necessary documents relating to the vehicle.

¶23

In the light of the above circumstances, the petitioner is directed to produce the relevant documents before the first respondent and on production of such documents and after hearing the petitioner, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders according to law.

¶24

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶25

Dr.G.Yethirajulu, J

¶26

13^th August, 2004

¶27

Note: Issue CC in two days

¶28

B/o.

¶29

Isn

¶30

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

// TRUE COPY //

SECTION OFFICER

1 The Registering Authority,

¶35

Transport Department, Government of Andhra Pradesh,

¶36

Secunderabad.

¶37

2 The Motor Vehicle Inspector,

¶38

R.T.A., Hyderabad.

¶39

3. Two CCs to the G.P. for Transport, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT).

¶40

4. Two CD copies.

Mr. Md. Kaleem, v. The Registering Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Md. Kaleem, v. The Registering Authority

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

S. Bhaskar, Vs The Senior Deputy Director General (Electrical) BSNL

L.Mallesham Vs Depot Manager

Mr. B. Nageswara Rao S/o Late B. Nagamanaidu Vs The Senior Deputy Director General (Electrical)

Prayaga Satya Venkata Triyambaka Janaki Ramaiah, Vs Sri Veera Venkata Satyanarayana Swamy Devasthanam

Smt.B.Mangayamma, Vs Apsrtc rep., by its Vice Chairman and Managing

Ch. V.R.N. Sastry, Vs The Deputy Commissioner of Labour