Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ambati Raju vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 24 June, 2020
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
WRIT PETITION No.10663 of 2020
ORDER:(Heard and pronounced through Blue Jeans App(virtual) mode, since this mode is adopted on account of prevalence of COVID-19 Pandemic) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology. With their consent, the Writ Petition is disposed off at the stage of admission.
2. The Writ Petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in seizing the Lorry bearing No.AP 37 TE 9844 of the petitioner, without following due procedure under the relevant statues as illegal, arbitrary and for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the vehicle from their custody.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of the Lorry bearing No.AP 37 TE 9844 and that the same was seized by the 3rd respondent on 13.06.2020 on the allegation of transporting the sand illegally. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sand was not transported from any prohibited area but from the patta lands and that the 3rd respondent seized the vehicle highhandedly alleging that the vehicle in question is being used for transporting the sand illegally. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent cannot seize the vehicle and the same is violative of Clause 16 of G.O.Ms.No.71, dated 04.09.2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's family is dependent on the income earned from the vehicle in- question and if the same remain in the custody of the respondents without putting it to use, the vehicle would be damaged and the petitioner would suffer loss. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, in similar circumstances, was pleased to grant directions to release the seized vehicles on condition of payment of penalty in terms of Clause 16 2 of G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 04.09.2019 and that this Court may consider passing of similar orders. The learned counsel for respondents are agreeable for passing similar orders.
4. The orders referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner are filed along with the material papers. After going through the orders passed in Writ Petition No.671 of 2020 dated 08.01.2020 and Writ Petition No.5047 of 2020 dated 02.03.2020, this Court is inclined to pass similar order.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with a direction to the respondents to impose penalty in terms of Clause 16 of G.O.Ms.No.71 dated 04.09.2019 and on payment of such penalty by the petitioner, the respondents shall release the vehicle in question forthwith. There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.
Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_____________________ NINALA JAYASURYA, J Date : 24.06.2020 Sj 3 18 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA WRIT PETITION No.10663 of 2020 24.06.2020 sj