Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Khurshid All Hasan Ali vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 18 May, 2021
THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
WRIT PETITION No.10209 of 2021
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the 2nd respondent in not releasing the vehicle of the petitioner bearing No.AP02 TE 5166 seized under Vehicle Check Report No.AP004/May2021/003369 dated 12.05.2021, which was seized by the 3rd respondent as per application dated 13.05.2021 by accepting the weekly tax as per G.O.Ms.No.140 dated 12.08.2002 as illegal and arbitrary.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the subject vehicle which is a contract carriage vehicle covered Contract Carriage Permit valid the district of Hyderabad valid upto 17.02.2026. In view of lockdown imposed by the Telangana Government, some persons belonging to Andhra Pradesh engaged the subject vehicle on hire to take them to Tirupathi and then, the petitioner got temporary permit online from 11.05.2021 to 17.05.2021. While so, on 12.05.2021 during the vehicle check, the subject vehicle was seized on the allegation that vehicle is carrying individual passengers travelling from Miyapur, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad to Kadapa and Tirupathi by paying individual fares, there is unauthorized alteration of seating capacity, there is permit violation and the vehicle is plying without payment of tax.
3. Heard Sri B.Siva Ramakrishnaiah, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Transport and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission.
2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while seizing the subject vehicle the 3rd respondent insisted to pay tax of one month and one month penalty, which is not correct and the petitioner is liable to pay only the weekly tax as per G.O.Ms.No.140 dated 12.08.2002. He submits that though the manager of the petitioner went to 2nd respondent office at Tirupathi on 13.05.2021 along with application for release of vehicle by accepting tax for seven days, but no communication was received from the 2nd respondent. He submits that if the vehicle is kept idle, it may be damaged due to exposure to sunlight and rain.
5. On the other hand, learned Government Pleader for Transport submits that since the subject vehicle is plying without payment of tax, the petitioner has to pay the tax and compounding fee as levied in the vehicle check report.
6. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will pay Rs.61,250/-, which is tax levied in the vehicle check report for release of vehicle to him and he may be permitted to make a representation to the respondents by raising all the grounds. Learned Government Pleader also fairly conceded for the same.
7. Taking into consideration the submission of the learned counsel on either side, the respondents are directed to release the subject vehicle on condition of petitioner depositing an amount of Rs.61,250/- (Rupees sixty one thousand two hundred and fifty only) and thereafter the petitioner shall make a representation raising all the grounds and the respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. The 3 petitioner shall also give an undertaking that he will not create any third party interest in respect of subject vehicle and he will produce the vehicle whenever required.
8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J 18th May, 2021 PVD 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI disposed of WRIT PETITION No.10209 of 2021 18th May, 2021 PVD