HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15015 of 2026 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE ARINDAM SINHA, J. HON'BLE SATYA VEER SINGH, J. 1. Mr. Indrajeet Chaurasia, learned advocate appears for petitioner. He submits, respondent no.4 (the financier) has sold away the vehicle. Taking into account monies repaid by his client as well as sale value recovered, said respondent has received entire sum. Still, his client is being harassed. He draws attention to notice dated 17th June, 2026 issued by respondent no.3 (RTO) demanding tax allegedly unpaid from 1st January, 2022, in respect of the vehicle. He seeks interference. 2. Mr. Mohan Srivastava, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears for State and submits, by said notice dated 17th June, 2026 petitioner was called upon to furnish explanation. He did not do so. 3. We do not deem it necessary to notice respondent nos. 4 and 5 (the financier). This is because petitioner says, the vehicle was sold away. Petitioner has extension of time to reply to the notice, furnishing particulars of the sale. In event petitioner is unable to do so, he may request respondent no.3 to obtain information from the record since sale of the vehicle would be recorded. It follows, if there has been sale, it can only be upon recovery of taxes. Petitioner to approach said respondent with certified copy of this order. 4. The writ petition is disposed of. October 5, 2026 Mohini Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhay Pratap Singh, Anoop Singh, Indrajeet Chaurasia Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. (Arindam Sinha,J.) (Satya Veer Singh,J.) Ratanchandra Ghosh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) Digitally signed by :- MOHINI RAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad