Petitioners sought a mandamus restraining seizure and detention of their All India Tourist Vehicles under Section 207(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act until Central Government rules were framed. Counsel submitted the cause did not survive; the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3302 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SARATH
WRIT PETITION NO: 4228 OF 2014
Between:
...PETITIONERS
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, in the nature of writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order declaring that the All lndia Tourrst Vehicles of the petitioners bearing registration Nos. UP 83 T 6827, UP 83 T 6826, MH 40 Y 0999, I\4H 40 Y 9999 shall not be seized and detained under sub-section (1)of
sectio 207 of the l',4otor Vehicle Act, 1988 by the offi,;r rs authorized in this behalf by Andhra Pradesh State Government till the Centrz I Government frames Rules prescribing the method and manner of seizure :rr r detenlion of the All lndia Tourist Vehicles as enjoined under Sub-section ( 1 ) f Sectron 207 of the IVV Act.'1988.
I.A. NO: 1OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 5221 0F 20141
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in th€ ;ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cor, 1 may be pleased to direct the respondents and the persons authorized by the(l )vernment of Andhra Pradesh under Sec. 207(1) of the IVV Act, 1988 not to s( i .e and detain the All lndia Tourist Vehrcles of the petitioners bearing registratio-r Nos. UP 83 T 6827, uP 83 T 6826, MH 40 Y 0999, tVH 40 Y 9999.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI B. SIVARAMAKRISHNAIAt
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR TRANSPORT
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.4224 OF 20L4
ORDER:
Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to costs
any, sherll stand closed.
sD/BHAVANI SWAMY IS NT REGIST
//TRUE COPY//
TION OFFICER
To
MP GJP MM-I
HIGH COURT
DA-l ED:0210912025
I trE S \
,r<br>a:'.
a
li, '-a I
09 JA\ )26
!
-tt'i
- '* .1./
"(r .r -\ rt,: ( - "-
>./
ORDER
WP.NI,.4228 of 2014
DISMISSING THE W'ITIT PETITION AS IN =RUCTUOUS WITIIOUT COSTS
@rvr TiTETF
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Bhuvaneshwar Indrasen Agrawal
Interstate Road Transport Co.
M/s Kankar Roadways (Rep. by Navpreet Singh Garcha)
State of Andhra Pradesh (Rep. by Principal Secretary, Transport, Roads and Buildings Department)
The Transport Commissioner, Government of Andhra Pradesh
The Joint Transport Commissioner (Enforcement)
K. Sarath
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
