S. R. NAYAK, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is the owner of the Motor vehicle bearing Reg. No. AAD 1575. In this writ petition, he is assailing the validity of the action of the second Respondent in seizing and detaining the lorry vide his order dated 19-8-2000. ( 2 ) WE have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Spl. G. P. for Taxes. The learned Spl. G. P. for Taxes quite fairly and according to us quite rightly, conceded that Section 29 of the a. P. G. S. T. Act, 1957 (the Act, for short) does not empower the 2nd respondent to seize and detain the Motor Vehicle, but he can only seize and detain the goods carried by the carrier. By the impugned endorsement the second respondent informed the petitioner that the lorry would be released only the event of payment of tax as per section 29 (6) (a) of the Act. This direction issued by the 2nd respondent; ex facie is illegal and unauthorised. Therefore, we hold that the action of the 2nd respondent in seizing and detaining the motor vehicle of the petitioner is illegal and unauthorized. ( 3 ) ON that short ground, we allow the writ petition, quash the impugned endorsement dated 19-8-2000. A direction shall issue to the 2nd respondent to release the subject Motor Vehicle to the custody of the petitioner forthwith. No costs.