Allowed

Sri Sai Travelz v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Jun 2023WP/9133/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the illegal seizure of a contract carriage and seeking its release. The High Court directed the respondents to release the vehicle seized during a check report, subject to the petitioner paying the admitted tax, while leaving assessment proceedings open.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to release the petitioner's contract carriage bearing No. AP 29 W 3393 subject to the petitioner paying the admitted tax.

Sri Sai Travelz Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^{32e6 ]}

¶2

oF TELANGANA

¶3

rN rHE^HrGH "orTfSIrtJ*=oBtsE (SPecial Original^{Jurisdiction)}

¶4

FRIDAY,^{THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE} rwo iiouseND^{AND TwENTYTHREE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEC'V' BHASKARREDDY}

¶7

WRIT PETITI^{ON NO:9133 0F 2023}

¶8

Betweenj Sai Travelz,^{4_300-CWS Colony, Balaii Na_g_ar, Ghatkesar, Ranga Reddy} 6i;ffi Ril^{b, s' Raj shekar Goud'ase 40 vears'} ...PETlrloNER

¶9

AND

¶10

I 2 iffi^{s.L1lhlti+*I**trf, "$:i'{"i,"^ri'..lfl iigi';:J3f,rm-1,"'}

¶11

2 District.

¶12

District. tir"J'ii7itor.^{v"hicles lnspector, Vigilance and Enforcement} ...=rroDENTS

¶13

¶14

PetitionunderArticle226oftheConstitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe circumstances^{statedin tne aftiaavit filed therewith'the High Court maybe} pleased to issue^{writ order or direction especially one in the Nature of Writ of} Mandamus^{declaringtne seizureof petitioner's Contractcarriage bearing No'AP} 29W3393videvehiclecheckreportNo.0023265da|ed22-03.2023isillegal' arbitrary and^{violative of Article19(1) (g) of the Constitution of lndia and further} declare the^{action of the 2nd respondentin not releasingthe petitioner,s vehicle} Goods carriage^{bearing No' AP 29 W 3393 is also illegal' arbitrary and contrary} tolawandconsequentlydirectthe2ndrespondenttoreleasethepetitioner,s Goods Carriage^{bearingNo.AP 29 W 3393 in favourof the petitioner'} IA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶15

Petition under^{Section 151 CPC praying that inthe circumstancesstated} in the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition' the High Court may be pleasedto} direct the 2nd^{respondentto release the Petitioner's contract carriagebearing} No.AP29W3393seizedvideVehiclecheckreportNo.0023265dated 22-03-2023bythe3rdrespondenttothepetitioner,pendingdisposalofthemain writ^petition.

¶16

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRICH'RAVINDER} Counsel forthe Respondents:^{GP FORTRANSPORT} The Court made the^{following:ORDER}

¶17

-__-\

¶18

HON'B ,I) SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR III}DDY .TIltIT PETITION No .9133 of 2o23

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This Wr;t F,et tion is filed with the followine relie.

¶21

... ,o ISS Lc an appropriate writ, order or clirectic,r. more prel'erzrbl ' one in the nature of Writ cf Mzcr larnus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in not .cleasing the petit :rrer's Contract Carriage (bus) Vehicle hearing Registrar rr No. AP 29 W 3393 seizecl under Vehic t: lht.ck Reporl l\ r .CO23265, dated 22.03.2023 by responrl,:r r No.3 as per lit v lard down by this Court as iilegal, a _: trary, unjr.rst a rc consequently direct respondenr, 1,16, ! 16 forthwit h release the petitioner,s Contract Oarrial;: (br-Ls) Vehicle . .'

¶22

It is; t^j-re c ase of the petitioner that he is r: pe.-ating vehicle bearin 3 No. Ap 29 W 3393 as a Contri:ct (bus) Carriage^r/ehir te. The said vehicle developerl ma. or. r(.pairs and for want rf funds, he couid not send the sarle to the mechanic she< itnd kept in a parked condil_ion rr,: arby his residence.

¶23

It is ttre: contention of the learned couns:i fo: the petitioner that vrhile p\iing, the said^{vehicleu'as stcpped} and^{checkei- t} /^{respondent No'3 at Medchal and {i:riz€dttle} 2 :.O3.2O23^{Llnder the vehiclecht:': < :'eport} vehicie^.ti

!..^;j

CVBR, J wp 9133 2023

No.0023265 and in the said^{vehiclecheck report,}

¶28

respondent No.3 found the^{following irreguiarities:}

¶29

Without Registration Certihcate.

¶30

Without permit.

¶31

Without Tax.

¶32

Without Fitness Certificate.

¶33

Without Insurance^Certificate.

¶34

Without Pollution Check^Certificate.

¶35

l,earned counsel for the^{petitioner has contendedthat} rhe has approached respondent No'2 stating that he is using the vehicle since^{March 2013 onwardsand the} vehicle was kept at his residence^{because of Covid-l9} Pandemic^{he is not operating the vehicle. Respondent No'2} has insisted the^{petitionerto pay the tax, penaltyand} compounding fee^{as a condition for release the said vehicle'} Learned counsel for the^{petitioner has vehemently argued} that though the^{petitioneris not liable to pay either any} pena-lty or compounding fee on^{the said vehicle, the} respondents are insisting^{to pay thepenalty and} compounding fee as a condition^{for releasingof the said} vehicle.

CVF}R. J \'r^q B3 t02l

¶40

Le arnt: I Governntent Pleader for Transpo-- appearing lor the re tp rr.Ldents has submitted that if thr: petitioner pays the acl n tted ta-x nnd compounding fce, t re vehicle rvill be rel :ased. It is lurther subntittei th,lt the responden,-s nra,v be allou,ed to proceed for : rnrlucting assessn_. ent l roceedings rn accordance u.itlr larv

¶41

In vitrv., ol the said submissions, this; Wr.i lretition is disposecl cf lirecting the respondents tc rele:1.;e vehicle bearing No. i P 29 W 3393 which was seized ulr- er r/ehicle Check Repor No. O023265, dated 22.O3.2023 r.ubject to the petil ione' paying the admitted tax. 'l'ht: r::,po.tdents are at liber ]'^{1-o proceed} for conductrng i1:isesisment proceedi.rgs;, I eny, in zrccordance with law. Ttrrrr,r shall be no order as t( costs.

¶42

As a l;e r:el, miscellaneous petitions pendi - q, f anv, shail statrd c[ ,sed

¶43

To,

¶44

SD/. P. PADI\IANABHA REDDY ASSIS'-,ANI REGISTRAR //rRUE coPY/l (. ,l) SE()TII]N OFFICER

¶45

1 The Secretary F -'cional Transport Authority, Uppal, \iledcl ir t-tVzLlkajgiri District.

¶46

2 The l\rlotor ',/el- ic ;s lnspector, Vigilance and Enforcernent. J One CC to SRI L J RAVINDER, Advocate [OPUC]

¶47

4 Two CCs to Gl) I OR TRANSPORT, High Court foi the Sta r: cf l elangana. lourl

¶48

Two CD Copies BN GJ R-,-

HIGH COUR:T

DATED:16/0t6'2:023

ORDER

WP.No.913il ol 2023

DISPOSINGi^()F THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT C(^IS}TS ($'r.,.O

¶55

-,,ri,.Si,ll,-
a
'I
'r I jt]l ?$il I

¶56

r\ 1! gro,:,

Sri Sai Travelz v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Sai Travelz 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

Statutes considered

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

M/S. Gayatri Traders Vs The State of Telangana

Badugu Thirupathi Vs The State of Telangana