Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 210 (UTT)

Attinder Pal Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

2018-04-19

V.K.BIST

body2018
JUDGMENT : V.K. BIST, J. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief: “(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.4 to release the J.C.B. bearing U.K. 18 CA 3785 of the petitioner forthwith without any unreasonable delay because the petitioner has already deposited the amount of fine imposed upon him as a fine for such illegal mining, else the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury and the same cannot be compensated by any means.” 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the J.C.B. bearing registration no. U.K. 18 CA 3785. On 16.2.2018, when he was carrying the sand for construction, his vehicle was seized by respondents, on the ground of non production of any licence for carrying the sand. On 28.3.2018, due to non production of the valid licence, the respondents imposed a cost of Rs.15,000/- upon the petitioner and the petitioner deposited the same through challan. Thereafter, on 28.3.2018, respondent no.2 issued a letter to the respondent no.3 for releasing the J.C.B. of the petitioner, on the ground that petitioner has deposited the fine amount imposed upon him. Thereafter, petitioner approached the respondent nos.3 & 4 for release of his J.C.B.; but respondent nos.3 & 4 refused for releasing the same. On 19.2.2018, petitioner approached to the S.S.P. Udham Singh Nagar for release of truck, but nothing has been done by the S.S.P. in this regard. Hence this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the letter dated 28.3.2018 issued by the Forest Range Officer, Bannakhera, Udham Singh Nagar. In the letter it is stated that the required fine of Rs.15,000/- has been recovered from the petitioner and if vehicle is not required in respect of any other offence, the same may be released in favour of the petitioner. 4. So far as the deposition of fine from the petitioner is concerned, it is evident from the letter dated 28.3.2018 of the Forest Range Officer, Bannakhera that the petitioner deposited the fine amount; therefore, the vehicle should be released by the respondent-authorities, in case same is not required any offence at the earliest. 4. 4. So far as the deposition of fine from the petitioner is concerned, it is evident from the letter dated 28.3.2018 of the Forest Range Officer, Bannakhera that the petitioner deposited the fine amount; therefore, the vehicle should be released by the respondent-authorities, in case same is not required any offence at the earliest. 4. Considering the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that in case petitioner approaches Thana Incharge, he will release the vehicle, in case the said vehicle is not found involved in any other offence. 5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.