Judgment 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for both sides. 2. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the first respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 28.1.2012, directing the petitioner to pay the Motor Vehicles Tax, due to be paid to the Tamil Nadu Government. In the meanwhile, the first respondent had seized the original Registration Certificate of the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had further submitted that the petitioner is residing at Puducherry and the vehicle is also used within the territory of Puducherry. However, the third respondent had given the wrong address of the petitioner, as though the petitioner is residing at Chennai. In such circumstances, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. The learned counsels appearing for the respondents 1, 3 and 4, had submitted, on instructions, that the original Registration Certificate of the petitioner had been seized by the first respondent, since, the petitioner has been using the vehicle in question, within the state of Tamil Nadu. Further, the petitioner had given her residential address at Chennai. 5. In view of the above, the petitioner is permitted to furnish all the necessary documents before the first respondent, to substantiate her claim that she is residing at Puducherry and that the vehicle in question is being used, generally, within the territory of Puducherry. The petitioner shall appear before the first respondent, on 26.3.2012, along with the relevant documents, to substantiate her claim. Thereafter, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon, based on the enquiry conducted by him, within a period of four weeks thereafter. In the meantime, the first respondent shall issue a certificate stating that the original Registration Certificate of the petitioner had been seized and that it is in the custody of the first respondent. 6. Further, the first respondent and their subordinates shall not insist on the petitioner paying the tax, as demanded by way of the tax, dated 28.1.2012, until final orders are passed after the enquiry is completed. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Connected M.P.No.1 of 2012 is closed.