Quashed

Badugu Thirupathi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Jun 2023WP/8688/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking release of a seized vehicle. It directed the respondents to release the vehicle upon payment of admitted tax, allowing them to continue assessment proceedings. No penalty or compounding fee could be insisted as a release condition.

What did the court decide?

Vehicle to be released after payment of admitted tax; respondents may proceed with assessment proceedings; no order as to costs.

Badugu Thirupathi Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

FRIDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 8688 0F 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Badugu Thirupathi, S/o Eadugu Rajaiah, aged 42^years, Occ- Owner cum driver Rl/o H-No. 3-22311 , Ambedkar nagar, Kothapally Town and Mandal of Karimnagar'

¶10

...PETrroNER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, . Transport Roads tnd^{Buildings Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.}

¶13

The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Regional Transport Authority, Karimnagar District, Telangana Stale.

¶14

The Motor Vehicles lnspector, Enforcement and Office of D.T.O. Office, Karimnagar at Thimmapoor

¶15

...RES'.NDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in insisting to pay the tax and maximum penalty for release of vehicle bearing No. TS08 UE-3568 seized under vehicle Check Report No 339432 Dt- 01lO3l2O23 as illegal arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to release the vehicle of the petitioner forthwith.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying tflat in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to release the vehicle bearing No. TS08 UE-3568 seized under vehicle Check Report No 339432, Dt- 0110312023 seized by the 3rd

¶19

Respondent forthwith to the Petitioner Pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MAHBOOB HUSSAIN Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

)

¶22

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BTIASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.8688 of 2o23

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This writ petition is filed seeking issuance of writ of mandarnus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in insisting to pay the tax and maximum penalty for release of the petitioner's vehicle bearing No. TS 08 UE 3568 seized under vehicle Check Report No.339432, dated 01.03.2023 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently, direct respondent No.2 to release the vehicle.

¶25

It is the case of the petitioner that he is operating vehicle bearing No. TS 08 UE 3568 on hire amount as per the provisions of M.V. Act Rules. It is his further case that from March 202 1 because of financial problems and also health problem s, he did not operate the vehicle and kept the vehicle at his town

¶26

It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has paid the quarter ending tax on OI.Ol.2022 and the vehicle is.also covered by valid fitness certilicate valid up to 12.12.2021. While plying, the saidzlhicle was stopped and checked by respondent No.3

CVBR. J wp,8688-2023

at Rekurthi and seized the ',.ehicle on O1.O3.2O23 under the vehicle checl< report No. 3 39432 and in the said vehicle check report, respon(lent No.3 found the following irregularities:

¶32

Withour Driving License

¶33

No proof of Tax 31.03.2023

¶34

Maxi Cerb documents nill provided

¶35

Learnecl counsel for the petitioner has contended that he has approached respondent No.2 stating that he is using the vehicle sincc March 2O2l onwards and the vehicle was kept at his residence because of Covid-19 Pandemic he is not operating the vehicle. Respondent No.2 has insistecl the petitioner to pay the tax, penalty and compounding fee as a condition for release the sajd vehicle. Lqarned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that though lhe petitioner is not liable to pay either any penalty or compounding fee on the said vehicle, the respondents are rnsisting to pay the penalty and compounding fee as a condition for releasing of the said vehicle.

¶36

¶37

CVBR, J Wp_8688-2023

¶38

l,earned Government Pleader for Transport appearing for the respondents has submitted that if the petitioner pays the admitted tax and compounding fee, the vehicle will be released. It is further submitted that the respondents may be allowed to proceed for conducting assessment proceedings in accordance with law.

¶39

In view of the said submissions, this Writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to release vehicle bearing No.TS 08 UE 3568 which was seized under vehicle Check Report No. 339432, dated 01.03.2023 subject to the petitioner paying the admitted tax. The respondents are at liberty to proceed for conducting assessment proceedings, if any, in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs

¶40

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

¶41

shail stand closed.

¶42

SD/-P.CH.NAGABHUSHAMBA ASSISTAD|lREGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// L+

¶43

SECTION OFFICER

¶44

To,

¶45

1 The Principal Secretary, Transport Roads and Buildings Department, The State of Telangana, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.

¶46

2 The Deputy Transport Commissioner, Regional Transport Authority, Karimnagar District, Telangana State.

¶47

3 The Motor Vehicles lnspector, Enforcement and Office of D.T.O. Office, Karimnagar at Thimmapoor

¶48

4 One CC to SRI MAHBOOB HUSSAIN, Advocate [OPUC]

¶49

5 Two CCs to GP FOR TRANSPORT, High^{Court for the State of Telangana.} touTl

¶50

Two CD Copies BN/ sBc/

¶51

HIGH COURT

¶52

DATED:1 610612023

¶53

._ _. -.- :: a.
it,'l
'i i,r l. r..,\a<br>1? lu. ?tfl
'i:....',

¶54

ORDER

¶55

WP.No.8688 of 2023

¶56

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶57

3
OS
)rs s
SLo I 0'1 -:l .

Badugu Thirupathi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Badugu Thirupathi 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

E Narsimulu Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Arqam High School Vs The State of Telangana

Kayithi Rajithamma Vs The State of Telangana

Masjid-e-Ek khana and Grave Yard Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Sri Sai Travelz Vs The State of Telangana

M/S. Gayatri Traders Vs The State of Telangana