The cranes and hoppers used by the petitioner do not meet the definition of a motor vehicle under Section 2(28) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

ORDER :

The present writ petition came to be filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring that the non-generic Cranes and Hoppers belonging to the Petitioners are not a vehicle within the meaning of Section 2(18) of the Motor Vehicles Act and consequently declare the action of the 4th Respondent in coercing the Petitioner to pay LT tax towards the No.6 non-generic cranes and No.3 Hoppers stationed at the Kakinada Port instead of passing detailed Orders on the taxability of the said type of non generic Cranes and Hoppers belonging to the Petitioners in accordance with the Order of this Hon’ble Court dated 14.03.2017, in Writ Petition No.5947 of 2011 as being arbitrary unreasonable and malafide apart from suffering from a non application on mind and consequently quash the memo No.029402B32015 dated 28.08.2017 and 02.11.2016, as being illegal, and arbitrary and without the authority of Law and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of Justice…”

2. The petitioner is a company in the business of hiring of cranes for loading and unloading activities throughout India, primarily in the State of Andhra Pradesh. The petitioner having entered into an agreement with the Kakinda Sea Port, since 2005, have erected mobile cranes and uploading hoppers on the site and commenced their operations at the Kakinada Seaport. The case of the petitioner is that the mobile cranes and hoppers are used only to load/unload cargo from ships or into the ships and the cranes are stationed on the berth which will have very little movement which includes forward and backward, along with one hatch (cargo hold) to another hatch of the ship having operators to operate them who are trained technically, and the type of cranes that are assembled at Kakinda Port is the ‘Harbor Mobile Crane Type-LHM 400’ and the cargo unloading hopper, are neither a regular crane nor a vehicle or motor vehicle as defined under the Motor Vehicles Act and the Rules made there under.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent, on 23.02.2011 had issued a notice bearing R.No.7885/C1/2011 whereby the petitioner was informed that he has not paid life tax and other taxes totaling an amount of Rs.2,04,03,080/- for the crane bearing chassis No.140451 and thereafter the said crane was seized and the operations of the petitioner were affected because of which the petitioner filed W.P.No.5947 of 2011 before this Hon’ble Court, which was disposed of on 14.03.2011 directing the petitioner as follows:

“…leaving it open to the petitioner to submit a representation to the Transport Commissioner, State of Andhra Pradesh, the 3rd respondent herein, within 15 days from today, regarding application of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules made thereunder for their crane. The 3rd respondent in turn shall pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such time, the vehicle check report dated 15.02.2011, shall not be given effect to...”

4. The further case of the petitioner is that even prior to filing of the writ petition, the petitioner has submitted explanation to the said notice dated 18.03.2011, explaining what type of crane was used by him and why it may not be taxed and clearly stated that the said crane used by him is a special type, adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises and is excluded from taxation. The respondents herein, instead of considering the said representation made by the petitioner have issued another notice dated 24.10.2011 as if the petitioner has not submitted his representation extracting the operative portion of the order of this Hon’ble Court in W.P.No.5947 of 2011 and sought for explanation from the petitioner for which the petitioner sub