Disposed

M/s. Indus Projrcts Limited, v. Govt of a.P., rep. by its Prl. Secretary

Telangana HC4 Apr 2005WP/7094/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the seizure of vehicle documents and the demand for life tax by the Andhra Pradesh Transport Department. The court observed the facts but chose not to decide on the legality of the seizure itself.

What did the court decide?

Directions to release seized documents (R.C. Book, PU certificate, driving licence) upon undertaking that the vehicle will not be alienated or charged during pending proceedings.

M/s. Indus Projrcts Limited, Vs Govt of a.P., rep… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

MONDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY

¶6

and

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO : 7094 of 2005

¶9

Between:

¶10

M/s. Indus Projects Limited, 201, Regency House, 680, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, rep. by its Director, B. Gautam, S/o. Dr. b. Dayakar Reddy, Plot . No. 487, Road No. 10, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.

¶11

..... PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 Govt of A.P., rep. by its Prl. Secretary, Transport Dept., Secretariat,

¶14

Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Transport Commissioner, R.r.District, Hyderabad. 3 Motor Vehicle Inspector, Transport Dept., Pargi, R.R.district.

¶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 any appropriate writ, order or direction preferably a writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in demanding life tax and penalty against vehicle bearing No. KA 30 N 7766 of the petitioner company as being highly arbitrary, illegal and void.

¶17

Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.O.KAILASHNATH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT

¶18

The Court made the following :

¶19

ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice G.Bikshapathy)

¶20

This writ petition is filed assailing the action of the respondents in seizing the RC Book and PU Certificate of Vehicle bearing No. KA 30 N 7766 and also the driving licence of Deepak Ramachandra Naik.

¶21

2. It is the case of the petitioner that vehicle No. KA 30 N 7766 was purchased in Karnataka and the petitioner company is engaged in construction, quarrying and carrying on other allied activities in Karnataka as well as in Andhra Pradesh and for that purpose the vehicle has to ply in both the States. While so, the vehicle was inspected by the Motor Vehicle Inspector and the documents were seized. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued to the petitioner demanding Rs.47,564/by the 2^nd respondent on the ground that the vehicle was plying in Andhra Pradesh for more than four months. The said notice came to be challenged in the present writ petition.

¶22

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the vehicle was purchased in Karnataka and life tax was also paid and for the purpose of attending the project work, the vehicle has to be driven in Andhra Pradesh, and therefore the very seizure is illegal and contrary to law.

¶23

4. We are not inclined to deal with the aspect of seizure. Inasmuch as the show cause notice was already issued, we leave it open to the respondents to proceed further pursuant to the show cause notice in accordance with the Rules. Pending final orders to be passed, the respondents are directed to release the seized documents, namely R.C. Book. PU certificate and driving licence of Deepak Ramachandra Naik, to the petitioner on furnishing an undertaking that the vehicle in question shall not be alienated nor any charge is created in respect of the vehicle, until the final orders are passed pursuant to the show cause notice.

¶24

5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶25

________________________ G.Bikshapathy, J.

¶26

_____________________ P.S.Narayana, J. 4^th April, 2005. C.C. in three days B/o KM

¶27

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶28

// TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER

¶29

¶30

1 The Prl. Secretary,Govt of A.P., Transport Dept., Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Deputy Transport Commissioner, R.R.District, Hyderabad. 3 Motor Vehicle Inspector, Transport Dept., Pargi, R.R.district. 4. 2CCs to G.P. for Transport, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad (OUT) 5 2 CD copies 6. 1 CC to MR.KAILASHNATH REDD

¶31

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G. BIKSHAPATHY

¶32

and

¶33

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.NARAYANA

¶34

WRIT PETITION NO : 7094 of 2005

¶35

th 4 April, 2005.

M/s. Indus Projrcts Limited, v. Govt of a.P., rep. by its Prl. Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Indus Projrcts Limited, v. Govt of a.P., rep. by its Prl. Secretary

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

M/S. Mahalakshmi Enterprises, Vs The Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Legal)

G, Manaiah, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Ahmed Khan Vs The Joint Transport Commissioner and

Secty Mins of N.Delhi and 4 Others Vs a.Tata Rao

M/s. Rallis India Limited, Door No. 1-7-241/11/B, Vs Commercial Tax Officer, Saroornagar

The Rate Payers Association, Vs The Govt. of A.P.