Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sheshmani Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 6562 ALL

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6562 ALL
Judgement Date : 12 July, 2022

Allahabad High Court
Sheshmani Pandey vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 12 July, 2022
Bench: Surya Prakash Kesarwani, Jayant Banerji



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 3
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11548 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Sheshmani Pandey
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Dinesh Kumar Tripathi,Ashutosh Tripathi
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.

Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:

i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned recovery citation dated 10.08.2021 & 28.12.2021 issued by the respondent no. 4 of Rs. 69129/-+ etc.

ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus of directing the respondents not to adopt any coercive measure against the petitioner in pursuance of recovery citation dated 10.08.2021 & 28.12.2021 issued by the respondent No. 4 of Rs. 69129/-+ etc."

By the impugned notice dated 28.12.2021, the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Jaunpur has required a sum of Rs. 69129/- be recovered from the petitioner towards tax and interest. The case set up by the petitioner is that during the period relating to the impugned demand of taxes, the vehicle in question remained in possession of the respondent no. 5/financer and therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in order dated 22.02.2022 in Civil Appeal No. 1217 of 2022 (Mahendra & Mahendra Finance Service Limited Versus State of U.P. and others), the demand cannot be recovered from the petitioner in respect of vehicle bearing registration No. UP 62 BT 1910 (truck).

It is submitted that in similar matter, this Court in Writ Tax No. 935 of 2022 has passed an order today i.e. 12.7.2022 which is reproduced below:

"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri B.P. Singh Kachhawah, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Pranjal Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondent no.3.

This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief:-

"i. issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned recovery order dated 04.05.2022 issued by the respondent no. 2, (Annexure No. 3 to this petition);

ii. issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 not to interfere/harass the petitioner in peaceful life and liberty of the petitioner."

Contention of the petitioner is that since Vehicle bearing Registration No. U.P. 86 H 9820 was re-possessed by the respondent no.3 in the month of May, 2012 and it has not been returned to him so far, therefore, the petitioner is not liable to pay tax under U.P. Motor Vehicle Taxation Act, 1997 for the period during which the vehicle in question remained in possession of the respondent no.3. He relied upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.02.2022 in Civil Appeal No. 1217 of 2022 (Mahendra & Mahendra Finance Service Limited Versus State of U.P. and others). He further submits that even the respondent no.2 has issued recovery notice dated 4.5.2022 to the petitioner requiring him to deposit the amount of tax for the period 1.4.2011 to 27.3.2022.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case of the petitioner, we dispose of this writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to submit an objection before the respondent no. 2 within three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order and in the event such an objection is submitted within stipulated period, the respondent no. 2 shall decide it in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the respondent no. 3/financer, within next five weeks.

For a period of eight weeks or till the order is passed by the respondent no.2, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned demand notice."

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the aforequoted order passed in Writ Tax No. 935 of 2022.

Order Date :- 12.7.2022

A. V. Singh

 

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter