Basavaraja vs. The State Of Andhrapradesh
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Admission (Civil Supplies)
Before:
Hon'ble Battu Devanand
Listed On:
5 Jul 2022
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
MAIN CASE No:W.P.No.17652 of 2022
PROCEEDING SHEET
| Sl.<br>No | DATE | ORDER | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. | 05.07.2022 | DEV, J<br>W.P.No.17652 of 2022 | |
| Admit. | |||
| Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and | |||
| the learned Government Pleader for Home and the | |||
| learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies. | |||
| The grievance raised by the petitioner in this | |||
| Writ Petition is that he is the owner of the vehicle | |||
| i.e., Ashok Leyland Mini Goods Vehicle registered | |||
| bearing No.KA 34C 1398<br>was seized by the 5th | |||
| respondent, who is the Head Constable, D.Hirehal | |||
| Police<br>Station,<br>Anantapuram<br>District<br>under | |||
| panchanama<br>dated<br>16.11.2021<br>without<br>any | |||
| authority under law. | |||
| The contention of the learned counsel for the | |||
| petitioner is that the 5th<br>respondent is not having | |||
| any authority to seize the vehicle of the petitioner as | |||
| per the law declared by this Court by order dated | |||
| 02.12.2019 in W.P.No.17827 of 2019, order dated | |||
| 29.10.2019 in W.P.No.16240 of 2019, order dated | |||
| 06.05.2021 in W.P.No.9535 of 2021 and order dated | |||
| 18.11.2021 in W.P.No.9969 of 2021. | |||
| On careful perusal of the<br>orders passed by | |||
| this Court in several Writ Petitions, considering the | |||
| entire<br>legal<br>position<br>and<br>case<br>law,<br>the<br>Head |
Constable rank officer is not authorized to inspect and seizure of the vehicles or stocks under relevant control orders. This Court noticing that several Writ Petitions are being filed before this Court complaining that the police staff, who are not having authority under law are seizing the vehicles alleging violations.
In the Prima facie opinion of this Court, the action of the police officers seizing the vehicles without any authority is nothing but violation of all orders passed by this Court as stated supra. When this Court asked the learned Government Pleader for Home with regard to any instructions issued to the concerned police officers of the State to follow the law laid down in the said orders passed by this Court, learned Government Pleader sought time till tomorrow.
Considering the importance of the issue involved in this Writ Petition, this Court intends to grant one week time to the learned Government Pleader for Home to enable him to file an affidavit of the Director General of Police, Government of Andhra Pradesh (who is the Head of the Police Department of the State) stating the factual position with regard to the steps taken by them to implement the orders of this Court passed earlier on this point as stated supra.
Post the matter on 12.07.2022.
___________ DEV, J
2
I.A.No.1 of 2022
Having heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home and the learned Government Pleader for Civil Supplies and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is clear that the 5th respondent has no authority to seize the petitioner vehicle. The validity of the search and seizure made pursuant to the Panchanama dated 16.11.2021 will be decided after filing affidavits by the respondents.
Meanwhile, the respondents are directed to release the seized vehicle of the petitioner forthwith to the petitioner on execution of personal bond stating that the vehicle will be produced before the competent authority as and when required for any enquiry and the vehicle will not be alienated or mortgaged during the pendency of the proceedings.
___________ DEV, J
05.07.2022 Note: Furnish C.C. by today
B/o. KLPD
