Disposed

Mohd.Jafar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Sept 2016WP/30767/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner challenged the seizure of his tractor and trailer, seeking release. The court, concurring with submissions that similar cases have been disposed of favorably, directed the second respondent to consider the release application.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to consider the application for release of the vehicle and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

Mohd.Jafar Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.30767 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 & Trailer bearing No.TS 06 EH 8815 and TS 06 EH 8816, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently to direct the respondents to release the above mentioned vehicle to the petitioner forthwith.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleaders for Panchayat Raj, Home, Revenue and Mines and Geology (Telangana).

¶6

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 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.

¶7

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.

¶8

In view of the above, the second respondent is hereby directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 07.09.2016 for release

¶9

¶10

of the vehicle 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

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶12

_____________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J

¶13

Date: 12.09.2016 BSS

¶14

¶15

HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY

¶16

¶17

WRIT PETITION No.30767 OF 2016

¶18

BSS

¶19

Date: 12.09.2016

Mohd.Jafar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd.Jafar 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

M/s.Pushpa Agro Tech, Rep by its Proprietor Vs State of Telangana, Department of Agriculture, Rep.by its

M/s. Corporate Industries, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kurva Sathyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana rep.by its Principal Secretary to

The Nidamanuru Primary Agricultural Co-op Credit Society Ltd. Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. Green Tech Crop Chemicals, Vs The Director of Agriculture

E.Venkatakrishnaiah, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh.