Manjula Chellur,CJ
Petitioner is before this Court complaining harassment at the hands of 4th respondent. According to him, he was permitted to construct a residential house in the land belonging to him after levelling the land. For levelling the land, permission was sought from the concerned local authority and only after getting such permission, he proceeded with the levelling of the land. However, 4th respondent came to the spot and seized the vehicle and therefore he is apprehending harassment at the hands of 4th respondent, if he were to proceed further with the levelling of the land.
2. Learned State Attorney submits, during patrolling they came across the vehicle carrying the material from the property of petitioner, therefore the vehicle was seized. On production of W.P.C. No.13008 of 2014 2 all the documents on 14.05.2014 i.e.next date of the seizure, they have released the vehicle. At the time of seizure of the vehicle, none of the documents were produced and explained, therefore, 4th respondent had to take custody of the vehicle.
In the light of above observations, we are of the opinion, the apprehension of petitioner, though seems to be genuine, but is beyond the control of 4th respondent. Accordingly, this writ petition is closed.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
sj 24/05