1 APHC010534862025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] TUESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 27730/2025 Between: 1. CHELUKANI VENKATESWARA RAO, S/O RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, OCC OWNER OF SREE CHAKRA TRAVELS, R/O PLOT NO.240, D.NO.5-13, SURARAM COLONY, QUTBULLAHPUR, RANGAREDDY DISTRICT, TELANGANA STATE ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, A.P. 2. THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT, COMMISSIONER KAKINADA DISTRICT. 3. THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR, O/O DTC, KAKINADA, KAKINADA DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. B CHANDRA SHEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: 2 ORAL ORDER: Heard Sri B. Chandrasekhar, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri Sk. Abdul Rasheed, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport. 2. Sri Sk. Abdul Rasheed, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport, has submitted the Written Instructions furnished by the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Kakinada. Copy of it is supplied to the Counsel for the Petitioner and the same is taken on record. 3. Sri B. Chandrasekhar, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner, has drawn the attention of this Court to G.O.Ms.No.285, T, R & B (Tr-II), dated 15.09.1984 (Ex.P.6). 4. On facts, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that the Vehicle bearing No.AR01Q 9991 was seized by the Official Respondents on 19.09.2025, while it was coming from Kakinada to Hyderabad. 5. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner further submits that the Vehicle was in transit through the State of Andhra Pradesh with its destination at Hyderabad. He would submit that the above Vehicle held an All India Tourist Permit, which was valid from 15.05.2025 up to 14.08.2025 (Ex.P.4). He would further submit that, out of sheer inadvertence, the Petitioner did not notice that the permit had expired. As on the date of seizure at 19:07 hours, on 19.09.2025, the above-mentioned Vehicle did not technically have a valid All India Tourist Permit, as it had expired approximately one month five days prior to the time of seizure. 6. On the face of it, it appears to the Court that the alleged violation was not deliberate but occurred due to inadvertence. It is also the opinion of this Court that the present case is covered by G.O.Ms.No.285, T, R & B (Tr-II), dated 15.09.1984 (Ex.P.6). 3 7. Having regard to the same, this Court is of the opinion that it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition with a direction to the Writ Petitioner to comply with G.O.Ms.No.285, T, R & B (Tr-II), dated 15.09.1984 (Ex.P.6), and also to pay the compounding fee as stated in the Challan dated 19.09.2025, issued at 19:07 hours (Ex.P.1). There shall be a further direction that the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Kakinada (Respondent No.2) shall be obligated to release the Vehicle bearing No. AR01Q 9991 forthwith upon compliance with the directions of this Court. 8. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the above directions. No order as to costs. 9. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. _________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt:04.11.2025 Note: Issue C.C. by 07.11.2025 B/o Vns