MANOJ KUMAR PATTNAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri B. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri C.A. Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the Forest Department.

(2.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order vide Annexure -6 or to assess the value of the vehicle by the opposite party No.3 in his presence and to deliver the vehicle on depositing cost as assessed. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioner had purchased the vehicle bearing Registration No. OR -15 -D -1955 by availing loan from SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into an agreement on 26.9.2005 with one Sayed Roshan, Son of Sayed Papa having transport business to manage the vehicle and paid Rs.70,000/ - in advance. It was an understanding that Sayed Roshan will pay Rs.5,000/ - per month to the petitioner and on 26.9.2005 as per the agreement Sayed Roshan took possession of the vehicle and managed the same. As per the agreement the said Sayed was responsible for any accidental, legal responsibility that may occur in course of use of that vehicle. In the month of December, 2006 the officers of Financing Company met the appellant and asked for payment of the E.M.I. dues and thereafter the petitioner met Sayed Roshan who had taken the truck under agreement. On enquiry with the said Roshan, the petitioner came to know that his truck has been seized for committing Offence under Orissa Forest Act, 1972.

(3.) IN view of the above, we dispose of the writ petition with the observation that the R.T.O., Balasore, Opp.Party No.3 may assess the value of the aforesaid vehicle and send the same to the Opposite Party No.2, Divisional Forest Officer, Balasore. It will be open for the Divisional Forest Officer to release the vehicle bearing Registration No.OR -15 -D -1955 in favour of the petitioner on his depositing the value of the vehicle as assessed by R.T.O. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of two months.