APHC010588622025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 30420/2025 Between: 1. V KRISHNA, S/O. SRI. K. VENKTESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O KANUMANAPALLI (V) (P), GUDUPALLI (M) CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517425 2 2. SRI C. SARAVANA, S/O. SRI. CHINNABBA NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O YAMAGANIPALLI (V) (P), GUDUPALLI (M) CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 517425 ...PETITIONER(S) AND 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 GEOLOGY OFFICER, PALAMANERU, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, GUDIPALLI POLICE STATION, GUDIPALLI MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...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 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 JCB Bearing Reg. No. AP 03 BU 7380 and Tractor (Compressor) Bearing Reg NO. AP 03 V 4673, of the 2 Petitioners without following any procedure under statutes as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 19, 21 of Constitution of India and 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 to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondent to grant interim custody of Vehicles of the JCB Bearing Reg. No. AP 03 BU 7380 and Tractor (Compressor) Bearing Reg NO. AP 03 V 4673, to the Petitioners, pending disposal of the above writ petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. G N UMA RANI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR MINES AND GEOLOGY 3 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 30420/2025 The Court made the following Order: The writ petition is filed challenging the action of the respondents in seizing the Vehicles JCB bearing Reg. No.AP03 BU 7380 and Tractor (Compressor) bearing Reg. No.AP03 V 4673 of the petitioners without following any procedure under law. 2. Heard Ms. G.N. Uma Rani, learned counsel for the petitioners 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 petitioners that the authorities intercepted the vehicle belonging to the petitioners while it was stationed in a vacant site at Kanamanapalli Village, Gudupalli Mandal engaged for carrying work on hire basis. While so, on 20.09.2025, the 3rd respondent has illegally seized the vehicles. The petitioner had produced the necessary documents. The petitioners contend that the authorities had no authority to seize the vehicles and he prays for release of the vehicles. 4 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 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. AP03 BU 7380 and AP03 V 4673 to the 12021 (2) ALD 535 5 petitioners upon furnishing a personal bond for Rs.2,00,000/- and producing proof in support of his ownership of the vehicles; (ii) The petitioners 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. 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: 04.11.2025 MSI 6 THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 30420/2025 Date: 04.11.2025 MSI