Madras High Court
Angammal vs The District Revenue Officer on 13 July, 2022
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.21094 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.07.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.21094 of 2009
Angammal ...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Revenue Officer,
Namakkal, Namakkal District.
2. The Inspector of Police,
CSCID, Salem, Salem District
..Respondents
Prayer:- Writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to
call for the entire records relation to the impugned order passed
by the 1st respondent in her proceedings No. C.Pa.187/08/F3
dated 11.09.2009 and quash the same and consequently direct
the 1st respondent to release the Mini Lorry bearing Registration
No. TN-28-J-2965 seized by the 2nd respondent on 04.06.2008 to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.No.21094 of 2009
the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.PRakasam
For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan
Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition was filed challenging the order passed by the 1st respondent dated 11.09.2009 and for a consequential direction to the 1st respondent to release the vehicle that was seized by the 2nd respondent on 04.06.2008.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 24.06.2022, this Court passed the following order :-
The subject matter of challenge in this writ petition is the condition that was imposed by the 1st respondent for the release of the lorry pending the enquiry under Section 6(A) of the Essential Commodities Act. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the interim order that was passed by this Court was not able to be complied https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6 W.P.No.21094 of 2009 with and he wants to take instructions with respect to the stage of 6(A) Proceedings.
2. The learned Government Advocate also seeks for time to take instructions. Post this case on 01.07.2022.
3. The matter was once again taken up for hearing on 10.07.2022 and it was submitted by the learned Government Advocate that the 6A proceedings are pending. This Court directed both the sides to ascertain the status of the vehicle as on today.
4. The writ petition was taken up for hearing today and the learned Government Advocate produced the photographs of the vehicle that was seized from the petitioner and it is seen that the vehicle has almost become useless and what remains is only the skeletal part of the vehicle. That apart, it is brought to the notice of this Court that this vehicle was involved in four https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6 W.P.No.21094 of 2009 other incidents. This Court does not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the 1st respondent and sufficient reasons have been given by the 1st respondent which does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. That apart, looking at the status of the vehicle, no useful purpose will be served even if a direction is given by this Court.
5. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
13.07.2022
Internet: Yes/No
Index: Yes/No
rka
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 W.P.No.21094 of 2009
1. The Commissioner, Tirupur Corporation, Tirupur.
2. The Collector, Tiruppur District, Tiruppur – 641 604.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Tiruppur.
4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, South Police Station, Tiruppur – 641 604
5. The Tahsildar, Palladam N.ANAND VENKATESH,J., https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 W.P.No.21094 of 2009 rka W.P.No.21094 of 2009 13.07.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6