Telangana High Court
Thandu Shyam Prasad vs The State Of Telangana And 2 Others on 23 September, 2022
Bench: T.Vinod Kumar
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
Writ Petition No.36888 of 2022
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to declare
the action of the 2nd respondent in not directing the 3rd respondent to
release the petitioner's vehicle, viz., Ashok Leyland Dost, bearing
Registration No.TS 29 TA 8025, seized in connection with FIR No.157
of 2022 dt.09.09.2022 on the file of the 3rd respondent, as illegal,
arbitrary and unconstitutional.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Government
Pleader for Prohibition and Excise appearing for respondent Nos.1
and 2; learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for
respondent No.3 and with their consent, the Writ Petition is taken up
for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission.
3. Petitioner contends that he is the registered owner of the
subject vehicle, viz., Ashok Leyland Dost, bearing Registration No.TS
29 TA 8025, and that the said vehicle was seized by the respondents-
authorities, on 09.09.2022, alleging illegal transportation of 7 bags of
black Jaggery, each weighing about 20 kgs., and 100 kgs. of alum, by
registering a case in FIR No.157 of 2022 dt.09.09.2022 on the file of
the 3rd respondent.
4. Petitioner further contends that mere transportation of black
jaggery and alum are not prohibited and the authorities have to
invariably record their 'reason to believe' that black jaggery and alum
are likely to be used for preparation of ID liquor, and only upon
recording such finding, the authorities can seize the goods as well as
the conveyance, in which, the said goods are being transported, as
has been held by the Full Bench of this Court in Ganesh Traders
(Kirana and General Merchants), Dhermapuri, Karimnagar District
v. District Collector, Karimnagar and others1.
5. The petitioner also contends that the Government, by issuing
Memo dt.20.12.2010, had directed the respondents-authorities not to
seize the vehicle carrying black jaggery/rotton jaggery or any other
form of jaggery to be an agricultural produce or its bio-products,
merely on the ground that such goods are intended for preparation of
ID liquor, when the same are accompanied by valid documents.
6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Prohibition and
Excise would submit that, on the petitioner's vehicle being stopped by
the 3rd respondent, it was found in illegal possession/transportation
of huge quantity of black jaggery and alum; and that on being
enquired with the driver of the vehicle, he had confessed to the fact of
carrying the quantity of black jaggery and alum and did not produce
any valid documents of its purchase and transportation, and
accordingly, the respondent authorities have seized the subject goods
2002(1) ALD 210 = 2002(1) ALT 611
under the cover of panchanama and registered a case, vide FIR
No.157 of 2022.
7. Learned Government Pleader, while bringing to the notice of
this Court the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of
Karnataka v. Krishnan2 and a Full Bench of this Court in Ganesh
Traders (1 supra), would submit that this Court had an occasion to
consider similar issue in W.P.No.34566 of 2022, and that when valid
documents, covering the goods under transportation, have not been
produced, the petitioner therein was directed to approach the 2nd
respondent, i.e. the Deputy Commissioner of the concerned area, and
make an application seeking release of the seized vehicle. Since, in the
facts of the present case, the petitioner is similarly placed, he should
also be directed to approach the concerned 2nd respondent being the
jurisdictional authority.
8. Having regard to the submissions made and considering the
fact that this Court in W.P.No.34566 of 2022, taking note of the law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka (2
supra) and also the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in
Ganesh Traders (1 supra), directed the petitioner therein to approach
the concerned Deputy Commissioner of Excise and the petitioner
herein is similarly placed, he is also directed to approach the 2nd
respondent by making an application under Section 46 of the
2000(7) SCC 80
Telangana Excise Act, 1968, seeking release of the subject vehicle i.e.
Ashok Leyland Dost, bearing Registration No.TS 29 TA 8025, seized in
connection with FIR No.157 of 2022 dt.09.09.2022 on the file of the
3rd respondent. On the petitioner approaching the 2nd respondent and
filing application, the said authority shall consider and dispose of the
same in accordance with law, keeping in view the law laid down by
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunderbhai Ambalal Desai v. State of
Gujarat3, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
two weeks from the date of receipt of the application in this regard.
9. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition
shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
__________________
T. VINOD KUMAR, J
Date:26.09.2022
gra
(2002) 10 SCC 283
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR
Writ Petition No.36888 of 2022
26.09.2022
GJ
