The petitioner is aggrieved with the notice issued at Exhibit P1, only to the extent that the petitioner is unable to remove the vehicle without a clearance certificate obtained fr the 1st respondent. 2. The petitioner's contention is that, the petitioner has approached the 1st respondent for issuance of a clearance certificate, for which the 1st respondent has not responded to. However, nothing is produced in the writ petition to substantiate that the petitioner has approached the 1st respondent. The petitioner has an alternate contention that the vehicle itself was seized by the police, which also stands unsubstantiated in the writ petition. On such unsubstantiated contentions, no mandamus can be issued under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner would definitely have to comply with Exhibit P1 notice.
The writ petition is dismissed.
vku/-
Sd/- K.Vinod Chandran Judge ( true copy )