Dismissed

K. Srinivas v. The Regional Transport Officer, Mahaboobnagar.

Telangana HC19 Dec 2013WP/37276/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the writ petition and the interim relief petition, holding that the petitioner must first apply to the competent authority for the release of the seized vehicle before approaching the Court for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to apply in writing to the first respondent for release of the seized vehicle within three days.

K. Srinivas Vs The Regional Transport… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2013)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.37276 OF 2013

¶2

Dated 1 9 th December 2013

BETWEEN:

K.Srinivas

…PETITIONER

AND The Regional Transport Officer, Mahaboobnagar, and two others.

¶7

…RESPONDENTS

¶8

Counsel for the petitioner: Sri B.Siva Rama Krishnaiah

¶9

Counsel for the respondents: AGP FOR TRANSPORT

¶10

The Court made the following:

¶11

ORDER:

¶12

This Writ Petition is filed feeling aggrieved by the seizure of the petitioner’s vehicle bearing registration No. KA 01 AA 8753 vide vehicle check report No.744219 dated 13.12.2013.

¶13

At the hearing, Sri B.Siva Rama Krishnaiah, learned counsel for the petitioner, has fairly submitted that his client has not approached the respondents with an application to release the seized vehicle before approaching this Court.

¶14

A Division Bench of this Court in Saleem Tours and Travels v. Joint Transport Commissioner and Secretary, RTA, Hyderabad and anothe r^[1] held that a owner of the seized vehicle has to first approach the competent authority with an application for release before availing the remedy of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶15

Therefore, following the ratio in the said judgment, I am not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition at this stage.

¶16

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the first respondent with an application in writing for such release of the seized vehicle. If such an application is filed, the first respondent shall consider the same in accordance with the law laid down in Saleem Tours and Travels (1 supra) and Shoukat Hussain v. Deputy Transport Commissioner and Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Adilabad and anothe r^[2] , take appropriate decision and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of three (3) days from the date of receipt of such application.

¶17

As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.46391 of 2013 filed by the petitioner for interim relief shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶18

_____________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J

¶19

19^th December 2013 v v

¶20

[1] 2000 (4) ALD 501 (DB)

¶21

[2] 2012 (5) ALT 609

K. Srinivas v. The Regional Transport Officer, Mahaboobnagar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K. Srinivas v. The Regional Transport Officer, Mahaboobnagar.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yenuganti Sivaramaiah Vs The Superintendent of Police

K.Chinnapa Reddy Vs Sri. T. Ajay Kumar

Meghana Travels, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh.

M/s. Sri Ramagiri Constructions Private Limited Vs M/s. Galaxy Enterprises

G. Satyanarayana Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Nagula Yugandhar Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh rep.by the Principal Secretary