Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 497 (AP)

Paspuleti Samba Siva Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh

2020-08-04

G.SHYAM PRASAD

body2020
ORDER : G. Shyam Prasad, J. 1. This is a writ of mandamus seeking to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in seizing the Lorry bearing No. AP 20 TB 4689 of the petitioner without following due procedure under statute as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(g) of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to release the above said lorry. 2. Heard arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Industries and Commerce. 3. The learned Government Pleader for Home submits that the matter is covered by Writ Petition No. 671 of 2020 dated 8.1.2020 and Writ Petition No. 5047 of 2020 dated 2.3.2020. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the registered owner of the Lorry bearing No. AP 20 TB 4689. On 23.7.2020 the 3rd respondent registered a case in Crime No. 227 of 2020 for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC, 22 of MMDARA alleging that sand is being transported without permit in the above vehicles and seized the said vehicles. The petitioner has not committed any offence or contravention. Petitioner's vehicle was stopped by foisting false allegations. Even as per sub-rule (16) of Rule 9-B of Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 as amended by G.O. Ms. No. 71 Industries and Commerce (Mines-U) Department dated 4.9.2019 the respondents are authorized to impose penalty. But the 3rd respondent without having power, registered the above case and seized the vehicle of the petitioner. If petitioner's vehicle is allowed to be retained by the respondents the same will be damaged and we will be put to much hardship and irreparable loss. 5. The learned Counsel for petitioner has fairly submits that the Government amended the penal provisions against the persons, who involved in sale/illegal excavation/unauthorized excavation of sand in prohibited areas where sand cannot be lifted as per G.O. Ms. No. 71 dated 4.9.2019. 6. The learned Government Pleader for Mines and Industries submits that as per Clause 16 of G.O. Ms. No. 71 dated 4.9.2019 the Government would pass orders. 7. In the Writ Petition No. 671 of 2020 this Court observed as under: "Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 deals with Offences and Penalties and according to Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71 dated 4.9.2019 the Government would pass orders. 7. In the Writ Petition No. 671 of 2020 this Court observed as under: "Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 deals with Offences and Penalties and according to Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 in the case of the vehicles engaged in illegal/un-authorized excavation in the prohibited areas (i.e., within 500 meters from the Ground Water structures, Bridges, Dams, Railway lines and cross drainage structures etc.,) transportation of sand outside the State and found transporting sand without valid Sand Way bill issued by the Assistant Director of Mines & Geology concerned, shall be penalized as follows: Vehicle Type First Time Second Time Tractor Upto Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 10,001/- to Rs.20,000/- Lorry fitted with upto 10 time capacity Upto Rs. 25,000/- Rs. 25,001/- to Rs.50,000/- Lorry fitted with upto 10 time Upto Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 50,001/- to Rs.1,00,000/- Mechinery Upto Rs. 50,000/- Rs. 50,001/- to Rs.1,00,000/- Therefore, at the best when the petitioner violated any of the conditions of G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 found transporting sand assuming that it is unauthorized, the Government may impose penalty as shown in the table. Therefore, recording submissions of the learned Government Pleader for Mines and Industries, the respondent authorities are directed to impose penalty in terms of Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 and on payment of penalty, the respondents shall release the vehicle." 8. Placing reliance on the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 671 of 2020 earlier by this Court, and there are similar facts in the present case, the respondent authorities are here by directed to impose penalty in terms of Clause 16 of the G.O. Ms. No. 71, dated 4.9.2019 and on payment of penalty, the respondents shall release the vehicle. 9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of accordingly at the stage of admission with the consent of both the Counsel. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the writ petition, shall also stand closed.