IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.31286 of 2014 BETWEEN K.S. Reddy AND ... PETITIONER The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner, who claims to be the owner of three tippers and one proclainer, is aggrieved by the seizure of his vehicles and states that a show cause notice was issued by the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology, Vigilance, SPSR, Nellore District, respondent No.2, to the leaseholders mentioning seizure of petitioner’s vehicle, dated 29.09.2014. Petitioner states that he has no role to play nor he is a quarry leaseholder. Petitioner has only given his vehicles on hire to one R.Narasaiah on rental basis and seizure of his vehicles since 28.09.2014 is seriously affecting his interest. The present writ petition is, therefore, filed questioning the action of respondent No.2 in not releasing the aforesaid vehicles.
3. Learned Government Pleader for Mines and Geology has received instructions, which state that the officials have seized the vehicles on finding that they are indulged in illegal activities and prior show cause notice was already issued to the three pattadars including Mr.R.Narasaiah, to whom petitioner allegedly gave the vehicles on hire. The said action, therefore, is pending under Rule 26(3)(ii) of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966. So far as the vehicles claimed by the petitioners are concerned, the instructions state that the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology is unable to assess the value of the vehicles.
4. Whether the petitioner and his vehicles are involved in the alleged illegal activity or not would only be known after the appropriate enquiry is conducted by respondent No.2. Since an appropriate show cause notice is already issued to three pattadars, respondent No.2 shall conduct an appropriate enquiry after receiving reply, if any, and then take appropriate decision in the matter, in accordance with law. Pending such an enquiry and subject to the orders that would be passed thereon, in my view, keeping the petitioner’s vehicles under seizure would not enure to anybody’s benefit. Hence, in my view, it is appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to release the vehicles subject to fulfillment of following conditions.
1. Respondent No.2 shall send a requisition to Motor Vehicles Inspector of the area along with a copy to the Regional Transport Authority requiring the Motor Vehicle Inspector to inspect the vehicles and process assessment of its approximate value to respondent No.2. The said exercise including assessment of value shall be done within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order and the R.T.A. as well as the Motor Vehicle Inspector shall act accordingly as and when a communication is received from the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology.
2. On receipt of assessment, as above, by the Motor Vehicle Inspector, the Assistant Director of Mines and Geology shall release the vehicle subject to petitioner depositing 50% of the value so assessed either in the form of cash or in the form of an irrevocable bank guarantee and the petitioner shall also file an undertaking before respondent No.2 that he shall produce the vehicle as and when called upon and required by respondent No.2 to facilitate the enquiry and shall also undertake that he shall not alienate or transfer the vehicles pending the enquiry aforesaid.
3. Since it is not on record as on today as to whether any crime is registered, the order of release passed herein shall be subject to the enquiry or orders of the learned Magistrate in case a crime is registered.
Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 21, 2014 LMV