Disposed

Poshamalla Nagarjuna, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Sept 2016WP/30314/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought release of seized tractor and trailer alleged to be used for illegal sand transport. The single judge directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application for release based on specific Government Orders within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direct the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application for release of the seized vehicles in light of the specified G.Os within three weeks.

Poshamalla Nagarjuna, Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.30314 OF 2016

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in seizing petitioner’s Tractor bearing No.AP 24 TC 3446 and Trailer bearing No.AP 24 TC 3447 as being illegal and arbitrary; and consequently direct the respondents to release the above mentioned vehicles to the petitioner.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for Mines(Telangana), representing the first respondent, learned Government Pleader for Home(Telangana), representing the second respondent and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue(Telangana), representing the third respondent.

¶6

The petitioner claims that he is the owner of tractor and trailer bearing Nos.AP 24 TC 3446 and AP 24 TC 3447. A perusal of the record reveals that the second respondent intercepted the tractor and trailer of the petitioner on 30.08.2016 alleging that the petitioner was transporting the sand illegally in the vehicles. The petitioner submitted a representation to the second respondent on 30.08.2016 with a request to release the vehicle. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner obtained necessary permission for transportation of the sand.

¶7

At the time of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Writ Petition No.39888 of

¶8

2015 dated 09.12.2015 and that a large number of similar and identical cases have been disposed of directing the authorities to release the seized vehicles in terms of G.O.Ms.No.3, Industries and Commerce (Mines.I) Department, dated 08.01.2015 as amended by G.O.Ms.No.15, Industries & Commerce (Mines.I) Department, dated 19.02.2015.

¶9

While concurring with the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleaders would submit that this writ petition may be disposed of in similar lines to the order of this Court in writ petition No.39888 of 2015.

¶10

In view of the above, the second respondent is hereby directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 30.8.2016 for release of the tractor and trailer and pass appropriate orders thereon in the light of the aforementioned G.Os within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶11