writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in seizing the petitioner’s tractor and trailor bearing registration Nos.AP22Q 8490 and AP04V 5030 respectively, as illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the seized tractor and trailor. The petitioner pleaded that on 16.12.2015, respondent No.2 seized the above-mentioned tractor and trailor on the allegation that they were used for illegal transportation of sand and that immediately thereafter, he has made an application to respondent No.2 for release of the seized vehicles. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2, who is the competent authority, has refused to receive the application=as per G.O.Ms.No.3, Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department, dated 08.01.2015, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.15, Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department, dated 19.02.2015, respondent No.2, who is stated to have seized the vehicles, is competent to release the same. As respondent No.2 is stated to have seized the tractor and trailor, it is appropriate that the said respondent considers release of the seized vehicles.

WP 964 / 2016

WPSR 4015 / 2016

CASE IS:DISPOSED

PETITIONER RESPONDENT RAMULU PUTTA   VS PRL.SECY., SECY., PANCHAYAT RAJ DEPT., HYD., & 2 OTHERS,

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
Writ Petition No.964 of 2016
Dated 07 th January, 2016
Between: Ramulu Putta …Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana, rep.by its Principal Secretary (Panchayat Raj & Rural Dev.), Secretariat of Telangana, Hyderabad and others …Respondents
Counsel for the petitioner: Sri Janardhan Reddy Ponaka
Counsel for respondent No.1: AGP for Panchayat Raj (TS) Counsel for respondent No.2: AGP for Home (TS) Counsel for respondent No.3: AGP for Revenue The Court made the following:
ORDER: This writ petition is filed for a mandamus to declare the action of respondent No.2 in seizing the petitioner’s tractor and trailor bearing registration Nos.AP22Q 8490 and AP04V 5030 respectively, as illegal and arbitrary. 
The petitioner sought for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the seized tractor and trailor. The petitioner pleaded that on 16.12.2015, respondent No.2 seized the above-mentioned tractor and trailor on the allegation that they were used for illegal transportation of sand and that immediately thereafter, he has made an application to respondent No.2 for release of the seized vehicles. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.2, who is the competent authority, has refused to receive the application.
At the hearing, it is submitted by learned counsel for both parties that as per G.O.Ms.No.3, Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department, dated 08.01.2015, as amended by G.O.Ms.No.15, Industries & Commerce (Mines-I) Department, dated 19.02.2015, respondent No.2, who is stated to have seized the vehicles, is competent to release the same. 
As respondent No.2 is stated to have seized the tractor and trailor, it is appropriate that the said respondent considers release of the seized vehicles. 
The petitioner is accordingly permitted to approach respondent No.2 with a fresh application and within three days of receipt of the said application, respondent No.2 shall consider and pass appropriate order as per the above-mentioned G.Os., for release of the seized tractor and trailor. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the writ petition, WP.M.P.No.1156 of 2016 shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 07 th January, 2016 VGB