A.Sekhar Goud vs. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO W.P.No.32543 of 2014

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Revenue (Telangana) appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Government Pleader for Home (Telangana) appearing for 3 rd respondent.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that 3 rd respondent has seized the petitioner's vehicle bearing Regn No.AP 29 TB 0049 being Goods vehicle (lorry) without following any procedure and that the said seizure is illegal and arbitrary.

3. It is not disputed that the seizure is governed by G.O.No.186 dt.17-12-2013 which modified the earlier Rules regulating quarrying and transportation of sand.

4. The amended Rules, notified in G.O.Ms.No.186 dt.17-12-2013, prescribe a penalty for the first and second offences and, thereafter, for the confiscation of the vehicle after following the procedure stipulated therein. Even in cases where a vehicle is sought to be confiscated, the officer who seizes the vehicle is empowered to direct its release under Rule 9-Q (6) on execution of a bond by the owner hereof for production of the vehicle so released as and when directed by the Competent Court. Proceedings for confiscation can be instituted in cases where the offences which have been committed are for three or more times.

5. In view of the amended Rule 9-Q (1) (i) and (ii), read with Rule 9-Q (6), the petitioner is permitted to submit an

application to the officer, who seized the vehicle; the said officer shall, within three days from the date of receipt of the application; examine whether the vehicle was used in committing the offence for the first and the second time; and, if so, consider directing release of the vehicle on payment of the prescribed penalty. If, on the other hand, the vehicle is found to have been used in the commission of the offence, for three or more times, the officer concerned shall consider directing release of the vehicle, in accordance with Rule 9-Q (6), on a bond being executed by the owner of the vehicle for its production as and when directed by the Court.

6. The entire exercise, culminating in an order being passed, shall be completed within three days from the date of submission of the representation by the petitioner; and necessary action shall be taken for release of the vehicle, in cases falling within the ambit of Rule 9-Q (1) (i), on payment of the prescribed penalty; and, in other cases, on a bond being executed in terms of Rule 9-Q (6) of the Rules. Similar order has also been passed in W.P.No.15938 of 2014 on 11-06-2014.

7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

8. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand disposed of.

JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO

___________________________________

Date :30-10-2014 kvr