APHC010490672025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH FRIDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: Between: 1. BONIGALA RATHNAMMA, W/O. B. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O LINGASAMUDRAM (V), SYDAPURAM (M), SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIVISIONAL DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY OFFICER, NELLORE, NELLORE DISTRICT, 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SYDAPURAM POLICE STATION, SYDAPURAMPURAM ANDHRA PRADESH 524 407. Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue nature of Writ of Mandamus Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of Respondents in seizing the Vehicles of the Bearing No. Tractor Reg. No. AP39 W 7577 and Trailer Reg. N the Petitioners without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25687 OF 2025 BONIGALA RATHNAMMA, W/O. B. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O LINGASAMUDRAM (V), SYDAPURAM (M), SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 524 407. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE DIVISIONAL DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY OFFICER, NELLORE, NELLORE DISTRICT, THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SYDAPURAM POLICE STATION, SYDAPURAMPURAM MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH 524 407. ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of Respondents in seizing the Vehicles of the Bearing No. Tractor Reg. No. AP39 W 7577 and Trailer Reg. No. AP 39 TP 7387 of the Petitioners without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3458] THE NINETEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA BONIGALA RATHNAMMA, W/O. B. NAGARAJU AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/O LINGASAMUDRAM (V), SYDAPURAM (M), SPSR ...PETITIONER THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, MINES AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. THE DIVISIONAL DIRECTOR OF MINES AND GEOLOGY OFFICER, THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SYDAPURAM POLICE STATION, MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India declaring the action of Respondents in seizing the Vehicles of the Bearing o. AP 39 TP 7387 of the Petitioners without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and 2 consequently direct the respondents to release the vehicle from their custody and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondent to grant interim custody of Vehicle Bearing No. Tractor Reg. NO.AP39 W 7577 and Trailer Reg.No.AP 39 TP 7387, to the Petitioners, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. G N UMA RANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25687 OF 2025 The Court made the following order: The writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in seizing the Vehicles bearing Tractor Reg. No.AP 39 W 7577 and Trailer Reg. No.AP 39 TP 7387 of the petitioners without following any procedure under law. 2. Heard Ms. G.N.Uma Rani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Sudeepthi Potluri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Mines and Geology appearing for the respondents. With the consent of both the learned counsel, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. 3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the authorities intercepted the vehicle belonging to the petitioner while it was stationed at the Lingasamudram Village, Sydapuram Mandal engaged for carrying out Agricultural purpose. The petitioner had produced the necessary documents. The petitioner contends that the authorities had no authority to seize a vehicle and he prays for release of the vehicle. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Naganath Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh1, observed as follows: “Having regard to the usage of the word, ‘driver’ or ‘person-in-charge of the vehicle’, the Government Pleader 12021 (2) ALD 535 4 tried to contend that even for release of the vehicle, the owner or the person claiming release of the vehicle has to pay penalty equal to the market value of the mineral along with seigniorage fee prevalent at that time. On a reading of the above Rule, there is nothing to indicate, the vehicle cannot be released, unless the penalty and seigniorage fee is paid. All that the rule states is that the penalty equal to market value of the mineral seized along with seigniorage fee prevalent at that time can be ordered to be paid at the time of interception of the vehicle, if driver or person-in-charge of the vehicle fails to produce a valid permit. But, nowhere the Rule postulates that the vehicle cannot be released, unless the same is paid.” 5. It is stated that relying on the above decision of the Division Bench, the writ petitions were disposed of earlier. One such decision is placed before me in W.P.No.10954 of 2021, dated 06.07.2021, placing reliance on the same, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: (i) The respondent authorities shall give interim custody of the vehicle bearing Nos.AP 39 W 7577 and AP 39 TP 7387 to the petitioner upon furnishing a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- and producing proof in support of his ownership of the vehicle; (ii) The petitioner shall give an undertaking to produce the vehicles as and when required either by the authority concerned or Court or the Investigating Agency and also give an undertaking that he will not alienate, encumber or alter the physical features of the vehicle. 5 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, all pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed. _______________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date: 19.09.2025 BSK 6 14 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 25687 OF 2025 Date: 19.09.2025 BSK