PAWAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 (ARTO, Saharanpur) to decide the release application dated 27.2.2010 filed by the petitioner expeditiously as soon as possible.

(2.) Heard Smt. Archana Tyagi, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.

(3.) The petitioner's Vehicle No. UP-12 T-1526 was seized by the ARTO, Saharanpur on 30.1.2010. The release application was filed by the petitioner on 27.2.2010 which is said to be still pending disposal before the ARTO, Saharanpur. It is submitted that the petitioner's vehicle has been detained as per provisions under Section 207(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 and UP. Motor Vehicle Tax Act, 1987 by the Transport Authority. The petitioner is ready to furnish security before the ARTO, Saharanpur, but even then, the ARTO, Saharanpur has not released the vehicle of the petitioner. An application for release of the vehicle was also filed by the petitioner before the ACJM, Saharanpur. The learned ACJM, Saharanpur had called for the report from the authority concerned and found that no Criminal Case is filed in the aforesaid matter and therefore, he did not pass any order on the release application for the vehicle.