The power of authorities to seize and detain vehicles used as contract carriages is subject to the conditions of permit and rules, including the requirement for a common purpose of journey and the submission of a passenger list.

Y. BHASKAR RAO, J.

( 1 ) THESE petitions are filed seeking writ of mandamus to direct the respondents and their sub-ordinates not to seize and detain the vehicles of the petitioners covered by all India Tourist permits if the vehicles are plied under contracts with the Agents licensed under Rule 297-A of the Andhra pradesh Motor Vehicles Rules, 1988 on the ground that it would amount to playing as stage carriage and to declare such seizures effected as illegal and void.

( 2 ) THE petitioners in all the writ petitions are owners of all India tourist vehicles and they were granted permits by the State Transport Authority to ply their vehicles throughout the country. All the petitioners have paid necessary taxes and the vehicles are covered by valid fitness certificates and insurances.

( 3 ) WE will take the consideration the facts stated in W. P. No. 2441 for the purpose of deciding this batch of writ petitions.

( 4 ) THE vehicles of the petitioners are being enagaged under contract by the agents who use licensed under Rule 297-A of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles rules, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as the rules ) to carry the passengers from one place to another and no passengers will be picked up or set down enroute. Under a mistaken impression that the petitioners are plying the vehicles as stage carriages , the checking officials are seizing and detaining the vehicles even though the petitioners have not contravened any provisions of law. When the action of the respondents was challenged earlier in this court, this Court held that exercise of power under Section 207 (1) of the Motor vehicles Act, 1988 is only discretionary and the checking officers are not bound to seize and detain the vehicles indiscriminately even if contraventions are noticed. A circular dated 18-5-1993 was issued by the first respondent directing the subordinates to seize the contract carriage vehicles invariably. When the said circular was challenged, another circular dated 27-5-1993 was issued. This court held that the Commissioner was competent to issue the said circular, but the guidelines contained therein were held to be bad. The petitioners then challenged the said judgment in appeal and this Court was not inclined to suspend the operation of the circular dated 27-5-1993.

( 5 ) THE vehicle of the first petitioner in w. P. No. 2441/94 was engaged under a contract for carrying 35 passengers from vijayawada to Hyderabad and the said vehicle was seized by the fifth respondent at Narsapur cross roads on the ground that the passengers were travelling in the vehicle on individual purposes and they paid the fare individually and therefore the vehicle was plying as stage carriage . The case of the petitioners is that the seizure and detention of the vehicle was illegal and void as the vehicles was plying under a valid contract with a licensed agent and all the passengers were being carried from vijayawada to Hyderabad. The checking officers did not release the vehicle and their action was only to terrorise the permit holders and prevent them from plying their vehicles.

( 6 ) THE first respondent filed counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition. It is stated that as per rule 297-A there must be a common purpose for the journey by a group of persons to engage the vehicle under a prior contract with the agent. The checking officers resort to seizure when they have reason to believe that the motor vehicle is being used in contravention of the purpose for which the permit is granted. Keeping earlier judgments in view, guidelines were issued to the subordinates officers by the transport Commissioner and the circulars issued by the Commissioner were upheld by this Court. The vehicle of the petitioners was checked and seized as the inspector had the reason to believe that it was being used for carrying passengers without a common purpose. The checking officers can verify the purpose for which the permit is being used. The vehicl

Click Here to Read the rest of this document