ORDER :

M. Satyanarayana Murthy, J.

1. This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

"to issue an order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Mandamus,

(a) declaring the action of the respondents in seizing the vehicles of the petitioners plying on the Interstate routes i.e. APO2TE0135, APO2TA5373, AP02TH4220, AP02TB6696, AP02TC3969, APO2TH4340, APO2TH4178, AP02TE2232, APO2TH4218, AP02TA7794, APO2TH4219, APO2TH4217, APO2TE0126, KA34A8874, KA34A0987, and KA01AK3929 belonging to the 1st petitioner and AP02TE2196, AP02TA3654, AP39X7699, AP02TA5769, and AP39X7599 belonging to the 2nd petitioner under concocted vehicle check reports dated 16.10.2019, 05.11.2019, 13.11.2019 and 14.11.2019 as illegal, arbitrary and against the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, Rules and mala fide;

(b) declare the action of the respondents in detaining the vehicles of the petitioners plying on the interstate routes without releasing them for the last several days in spite of the application made under Rule 448-B of AP Motor vehicles Rules 1989 with all the documents as illegal, improper, and unjust;

(c) direct the respondents not to resort to seizing of the vehicles of the petitioners, plying on the Interstate routes henceforth, unless grave irregularities exists

(d) declare that the petitioners are entitled for the damages for the loss of business and reputation, as determined by this Hon'ble Court and consequently direct the respondents to pay the said amount to the petitioners;

(e) direct the respondents to refund the tax paid for the seized vehicles from the date of seizure till release of the vehicles in the interest of justice;

(f) declare that the actions of the respondents are violative of petitioners fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g), Article 21 and Article 14 of the Constitution of India"

2. Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 are State and its officials, respondent Nos. 5 to 16 are officials in their personal capacity.

3. Husband of petitioner No. 1 was MLA of Tadipatri for the period 2014-2019 and the husband of petitioner No. 2 contested for the MLA seat, Tadipatri during the last legislative assembly elections from Telugu Desam party and he narrowly lost the election. Brother-in-law of petitioner No. 1 was Member of Parliament for the period 2014-2019 and earlier he was MLA of Tadipatri and discharged his duties as a Minister.

4. Both the petitioners are residents of Tadipatri town of Anantapur District, and their family has been carrying on business in transport for the last several decades. As of now, petitioners possess 31 stage carriage permits and 20 contract carriage permits. The details of the said permits and other particulars are given in the table 1 and 2 hereunder.

TABLE 1: Permit Vehicles (Stage Carriages) owned by the petitioners 1 and 2

TABLE 2: Contract Carriers owned by Petitioner No.1

5. The official respondents in their official capacity at the behest of political persons in the present government, seized the vehicles on flimsy grounds and contrary to the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and AP Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and detained the vehicles without releasing them, thereby infringed the fundamental right of the petitioners guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (g) and Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

6. It is specifically alleged in the affidavit filed along with the petition that since petitioner No. 1's husband, son and brother-in-law belong to Telugu Desam party and supported the said party in the last elections, they are targeted by the political party in power. In the process of tarnishing family reputation of the petitioners, party in power, utilised the services of the officials, who are arrayed as respondents both in the official capacity and personal capacity, to deprive the petitioners transport business which has been