WPMS/2015/2021
2021 Latest Caselaw 3910 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  WPMS No. 2015 of 2021
                                  Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Nalin Saun, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.

The petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, has come up with the case, that in pursuance to the impugned order, which is under challenge, i.e. dated 27.07.2021, the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Sadar), Dehradun, had declined to release the petitioner's vehicle, bearing registration No. UK07AW1259 (Tractor Trolley), in favour of the petitioner, which has been ceased by the respondents way back on 27.11. 2018.

If the order of denial to release of Tractor Trolley of the petitioner, is taken into consideration, in fact, it has been on the ground that a Writ Petition (PIL) No. 162 of 2018, Birendra Kumar Pegwal Vs. District Magistrate, Dehradun and others, which was decided by the Division Bench on 5th March, 2019, had laid down certain embargoes for the purposes of release of the vehicles, which was being utilized by the Forest Department for an engagement in the mining activities.

But, however, how that ratio would be made applicable in the given set of circumstances, is not a fact, which has been considered by the S.D.M. in his impugned order of 27th July, 2021.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, while making a reference to the judgment of the Division Bench dated 5th March, 2019, has also referred to the judgment rendered by the Coordinate Bench in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 3658 of 2019, Bhura Ram Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, wherein, the Coordinate Bench of this Court had considered the implications of the judgment of the Writ Petition (PIL) No. 162 of 2018, as decided on 5th March, 2019, and ultimately, it has concluded that the Writ Petition was disposed of directing the release of the vehicle on the payment of the penalty and fines as has been imposed by the Authorities.

This Court too had an occasion to deal with an identical issue in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1651 of 2021, Malkeet Singh Vs. District Magistrate Dehradun, which was decided by this Court on 21st August, 2021, almost on an identical parameter, as it has been laid down by the judgment of 7th January, 2020, as rendered by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3658 of 2019, as well as in the judgment rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 58 of 2021, Rohit Vs. State of Uttarakhand.

This Court is of the view that instead of keeping the Writ Petition pending, since the learned counsel representing the parties to the Writ Petition, have expressed their consensus that the Writ Petition can be disposed of in terms of the judgments dated 7th January, 2020, and 21st August, 2021 and 11th January, 2021, whereby, a direction could be issued to the respondents to consider the issue of release of the vehicle on the payment of the penalty and fine to be imposed by the respondents as per the circumstances of the case.

Hence, this Writ Petition too would stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid directions given by the judgment of 7th January, 2020, 21st August, 2021 and 11th January, 2021 and henceforth the respondents are directed, that subject to the conditions the petitioner pays the penalty or the fine as to be imposed upon him by the Authorities, they would be releasing the vehicle of the petitioner, in question, in accordance with law.

Subject to the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) Dated 27.09.2021 Shiv