APHC010101382025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3331] MONDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYFIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5841/2025 Between: 1. BANKA RAMESH BABU, S/O. PEDA KOTAIAH, AGED 48 YEARS, OCC BUSINESS, R/O. 1-45, ATTALURU, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH - 522 436. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TRANSPORT, ROADS AND BUILDINGS DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, THULLUR MANDAL, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, PALNADU DISTRICT, NARASARAOPET. 3. THE MOTOR VEHICLES INSPECTOR, O/O. DTO, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU DISTRICT. 4. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NARASARAOPET RURAL POLICE STATION, NARASARAOPET, PALNADU 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 pleased topleased issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the 2nd Respondent in insisting to pay the tax and penalty as the condition for release of the vehicle of the Petitioner's bearing Number AP 16 TH 9670 seized under vehicle Challan No. AP252970241130133416, Dated 30-11-2024 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to release the vehicle of the petitioner forthwith and to pass 2 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 direct the 2nd Respondent to release the vehicle of the Petitioner's bearing Number AP 16 TH 9670 seized under vehicle Challan No. AP252970241130133416, dated 30-11-2024 seized by the 3rd Respondent forthwith to the petitioner pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. GHANTA SRIDHAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 2. GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ::ORDER:: The above writ petition is filed to declare the action of the 2ndrespondent in insisting the petitioner for payment of the tax and penalty as a condition to release the vehicle bearing No.AP 16 TH 9670 seized vide vehicle Challan No. AP252970241130133416 dated 30.11.2024, as illegal and arbitrary. 2. The Petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing No.AP 16 TH 9670. The third respondent seized the vehicle vide vehicle Challan No.AP252970241130133416 dated 30.11.2024, pointing out infringements. The vehicle remained under the seizure of the third respondent. Hence, the petitioner approached this court. 3. Heard Sri Ghanta Sridhar, learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport appearing for respondents 1 to 3 3 and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for 4threspondent. 4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that the vehicle was seized based on the irregularities mentioned in the report; that the petitioner failed to pay tax; that the vehicle doesn't have a fitness certificate and the petitioner failed to pay insurance. The driver of the vehicle doesn't have a driving licence. 5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner while drawing the attention of this court to the judgment of the division bench in Saleem Tours and Travels Vs Joint Transport Commissioner and Secretary R.T.A. Hyderabad and another1 would submit that the vehicle seized for non- payment of tax etc., should be released at the earliest. 6. As seen from the check report the offences charged are as under: 1. Home State Vehicle with Non-Payment of tax/without tax/No tax/ LMV/LGV/ LPV [fine-112010] 2. No DL/Driving Without license (Sec 180) [Fine 5000] 3. No insurance to the vehicle (section 146 read with section 196) [Fine 2000] 4. Vehicle Without fitness certificate section 56 (MMV/HMV)(section 192) [Fine 5000]. 7. Thus, the penalty specified against the offences charged comes to Rs.1,24,010/-. In respect of payment of tax, no breakups have been shown. While levying the penalty, an enquiry needs to be conducted. The record 12000 (4) ALD 501 4 doesn't indicate the conducting of any enquiry. The 2ndrespondent is the competent authority to levy a fine after conducting an enquiry. 8. The Division Bench of the composite High Court in Saleem’s case while dealing with the release of a vehicle for non-payment of tax and certain other violations, observed as follows: “10.So read, it is clear that the lawmakers intended that the power of seizure shall not be used indiscriminately and in avoidable situations. Even in a case where a vehicle is being plied without permit, the proviso to sub-section (1) gives a discretion to the competent authority to seize the certificate of registration rather than the vehicle itself. Such discretion is expected to be exercised judiciously. The power of seizure shall not be taken to be a punitive measure, though there is certain element of deterrence in it. The provisions for seizure are introduced in various enactments, firstly to provide a deterrent effect and secondly, to facilitate the finalisation of enquiry and implementation of the orders passed as a result of enquiry. Attempts at circumventing the provisions of the statute are intended to be checked thereby. The seizure cannot be an end in itself; it should be a means to achieve the end. It need not be resorted to merely because there is transgression of law. Whether or not the vehicle should be seized and if so for how long are factors to be decided by the competent authority fairly and objectively on case to case basis keeping in view the broad objective indicated supra. No inflexible guidelines can be laid down. By way of an illustration, let us take a case of the vehicle not having registration being plied on the roads. The competent authority will be justified in seizing and detaining the vehicle apart from taking any action open to him under law till the defect is remedied and the vehicle is registered. Otherwise, there is every possibility of vehicle being used on roads without complying with the basic rule of registration. By detaining the vehicle till the vehicle owner takes necessary steps for registration, the transport authority will be ensuring compliance with the mandatory requirements of the Act and detention will not cause much prejudice to the owner in as much as the vehicle cannot in any case be put to use freely without registration. Let us also take a case where the concerned Transport authority has reason to apprehend that the vehicle would become scarce when once released and there are no effective means by which the ultimate decision taken by the competent authority after an enquiry is implemented. In such a case, the vehicle may possibly be detained in order to enforce the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and the allied Acts. Here again, the formation of belief should be based on relevant and existent grounds, but not on imaginary or illusory grounds.” 5 9. The judgment of the Division Bench squarely applies to the facts of the case and in fact, by following the same, several writ petitions were disposed of. 10. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, at the admission stage, directing respondents 2 and 3 to release the vehicle bearing No. AP 16 TH 9670 to the petitioner on the condition of paying the tax payable and other contraventions pointed out in the report dated 30.11.2024. The petitioner shall file an undertaking affidavit before the authority to the effect that the subject vehicle will be produced as and when required for enquiry and the same will not be alienated pending inquiry. No order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________ JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI Date: 10.03.2025 SNI 6 77 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUBBA REDDY SATTI WRIT PETITION NO: 5841 of 2025 Date: 10.03.2025 SNI