Varadharajan vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

K.K. Sasidharan, J.—The Tipper Lorries bearing Registration Nos.TN 63 L 8969, TN 67 AX 4002 and Tractor bearing Registration No.TN 63 AC 8979 owned by the respective petitioners were seized by the respondents on 21.06.2014 alleging transportation of minerals(sand). Thereafter, the respondents initiated statutory proceedings.

The respective petitioners approached the first respondent with individual applications dated 07.07.2014 for release of the vehicles pending disposal of proceedings. However, there was no follow up action to dispose of the applications for interim custody. The petitioners are therefore before this Court to direct the first respondent to release the vehicles.

The statutory authority is now seized of the matter. The question as to whether the petitioners have made out a case for interim custody of the vehicles is essentially an issue to be decided by the first respondent at the first instance. It is not open to the Court to adjudicate the issue without giving an opportunity to the statutory authority to exercise its function in accordance with law.

The jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain a writ petition for release of vehicle, pending disposal of confiscation proceedings without approaching the Competent Authority at the first instance, came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in The Deputy Commissioner of Civil Supplies and The Assistant Commissioner of Civil Supplies Vs. S. Damodaran, . The Division Bench was of the view that the petitioner should approach the Competent Authority at the first instance before approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The relevant observation reads thus:-

"13..............

a) In case any essential commodity or any commodity, package, vehicle, animal, etc., is seized or confiscated and the person from whom such commodity or vehicle is seized, or the owner of the commodity or vehicle intends to get an order for release of the commodity or vehicle, they should first avail the alternative remedy before the competent authority for release of such commodity or vehicle for the grounds and reasons as may be taken by the aggrieved persons;

b) In case such application for release of the commodity, package or vehicle is filed, the competent authority/appellate authority will dispose of the application immediately, preferably within a week. In case of any adverse decision, the ground should be communicated to the applicant;

c) Only when the competent authority/ appellate authority fail to discharge their duty, the concerned person may move straight away before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for appropriate relief;

d) However, it is always open to the High Court to pass appropriate order under Article 226, but generally it should be reluctant to grant such relief if the party fails to take recourse to alternative remedy. "

The first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the applications filed by the petitioners for release of the vehicles on merits and as per law, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petitions are disposed of with the above direction. No costs.