Dismissed

Chiranjeevi B S/o. Kistaiah, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Jul 2015WP/20082/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners approached the court for release of seized transport vehicles. The Supreme Court held that since vehicles were already in competent court custody, petitioners must move the appropriate court for relief. Writ petitions were closed with liberty to approach the competent court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to move appropriate court. No costs.

Chiranjeevi B S/o. Kistaiah, Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2015)

¶1

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION Nos.20054, 20071, 20082 & 20107 of 2015

¶2

Date : 10.7.2015

¶3

WP 20054 of 2015 Between : Panasa Thirupathi S/o Isthari R/o H No. 1076, Kamanpur, Karimnagar & others

¶4

Petitioner

¶5

And

¶6

The State of Telangana Rep by its Principal Secretary, PR Dept, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others

¶7

Respondents

¶8

The Court made the following:

¶9

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶10

WRIT PETITION Nos.20054, 20071, 20082 & 20107 of 2015

¶11

COMMON ORDER:

¶12

Since the issue raised in all these writ petitions is similar, they are taken up for disposal by this common order.

¶13

2. These writ petitions are filed aggrieved by the seizure of goods transport vehicles belonging to petitioners. Learned counsel for petitioners contends that even though petitioners were having valid transport permits to transport sand, illegally vehicles of petitioners were seized and same were not kept in the custody of the competent Court, therefore sought for direction for release of the vehicles.

¶14

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home produced written instructions which disclose that vehicles in W P Nos. 20054 and 20107 of 2015 were deposited before the competent Court under Form No. 66 on 6.7.2015 and vehicles in W P Nos. 20071 and 20082 of 2015 were deposited before the competent Court under Form No.66 on 4.7.2015.

¶15

4. Since vehicles belonging to petitioners which were seized were already kept in custody of the competent Court, petitioners have to move the appropriate Court seeking appropriate relief for release of their vehicles. Thus, granting liberty to the petitioners to move the appropriate Court for release of their vehicles, the writ petitions are closed. No costs. Having regard to the same, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed.

¶16

______________ P NAVEEN RAO,J

¶17

DATE:10.7.2015 TVK

¶18

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶19

WRIT PETITION Nos.20054, 20071, 20082 & 20107 of 2015

¶20

Date : 10.7.2015

Chiranjeevi B S/o. Kistaiah, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chiranjeevi B S/o. Kistaiah, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nenavath Munya Naik S/o. Bhadya Naik, Vs The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary to

Alikhya Labour Contract Welfare Society Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

K. Rafeeq, Vs The Municipal Council, Hindupur

Panasa Thirupathi, Vs The State of Telangana

K.L.S.R. Infratech Limited, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chiranjeevi B Vs The State of Telangana