Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 1046 (RAJ)

Dharm Chand Yadav v. State of Rajasthan

2002-05-22

K.S.RATHORE

body2002
JUDGMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Present petition is directed against the notice dated 7.5.2002 and order dated 18.5.2002 and demand notice dated 18.5.2002. Main grievance of the petitioner is that Truck No. HR-47-A-1325 has been seized with goods by the respondents. 3. The above truck loaded the goods on fare, cotton bales from Mana vadar In the State of Gujarat through Radhey Transport of India, transport contractor and commission agent Ahmedabad on 3.5.2002 to carry the said goods at Koshikalan in Uttar Pradesh. The said truck was passing through the territory of the State of Rajasthan on 7.5.2002 and was checked by respondent No. 2 and demanded transit pass with documents. Then driver was not having a transit pass, therefore, vehicle with goods was seized on 7.5.2002 by respondent No. 2 at Bharatpur-Deeg Road, near Deeg. 4. Respondent No. 2 issued a notice under Section 78(10-A) of the RST Act as to why the penalty under Section 78(10-A) may not be imposed. The same was replied by the petitioner on 18.5.2002. But the respondent No. 2 instead of releasing the goods and vehicle pass an order of penalty on 18.5.2002 itself levying a penalty of Rs. 6,13,815/- and also issued a demand notice for the said amount. 5. At the moment the petitioner only confined to release of goods and truck. The petitioner placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Division Bench in D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 917/2001 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 953/2001 M/s. Indore Maharashtra Road Carriers v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. wherein Division Bench of this Court directed, the respondents to release the goods seized, on applicant's furnishing adequate sureties to his satisfaction of the amount equal to cost of the goods so seized. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance in another Division Bench order on the stay application passed in D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 4216/2001 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4160/2001 M/s. North Eastern Carrying Corporation Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Similar order has been passed by this Court on 5.4.2002. 7. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance in another Division Bench order on the stay application passed in D.B. Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 4216/2001 in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4160/2001 M/s. North Eastern Carrying Corporation Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Similar order has been passed by this Court on 5.4.2002. 7. Since the petitioner only wants to get release of the truck along with goods and rest prayers are not pressed by the petitioner, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to direct the respondents in view of Section 78(4)(C) the goods which are seized may be released after taking adequate security of the amount equal to the estimated value as assessed by the respondents authorities.With these observation writ petition stands disposed of.Writ Petition Disposed of as above. *******