KODIYATAR KARMANBHAI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Additional Government Advocate takes notice for both the respondents.

(2.) The prayer in the writ petition is to issue writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the Lorry bearing Reg.No.GJ-36-T-9333. It is stated in the memorandum of writ petition that the petitioner is the owner of the Lorry in question and the second respondent-Food Inspector, Karnataka Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., Bidar, has wrongfully seized the vehicle.

(3.) Learned Additional Government Advocate submits that the petitioner was required to file necessary application in accordance with law seeking release of the vehicle. A writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be maintained to seek a direction to the authority to release the vehicle.