Motor Vehicles Act — Seizure of tourist vehicle — Expiry of All India Tourist Permit — G.O.Ms.No.285 dated 15-09-1984 — Compounding — Release of vehicle — Inadvertent lapse Where a tourist vehicle transiting through Andhra Pradesh had a valid All India Tourist Permit which expired 72 hours before seizure, lapse admitted as inadvertent, and the case found covered by G.O.Ms.No.285 (Transport) dated 15-09-1984, the High Court directed the petitioner to comply with the said G.O. and pay the compounding fee noted in the seizure challan, and upon such compliance, ordered respondent-authorities to release the vehicle forthwith. No costs; interlocutory applications closed. (Mozo Tours & Travels v. State of A.P., W.P. No. 34100 of 2025, decided on 08-12-2025, per Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad, J.)

Motor Vehicles Act — Seizure of tourist vehicle — Expiry of All India Tourist Permit — G.O.Ms.No.285 dated 15-09-1984 — Compounding — Release of vehicle — Inadvertent lapse
Where a tourist vehicle transiting through Andhra Pradesh had a valid All India Tourist Permit which expired 72 hours before seizure, lapse admitted as inadvertent, and the case found covered by G.O.Ms.No.285 (Transport) dated 15-09-1984, the High Court directed the petitioner to comply with the said G.O. and pay the compounding fee noted in the seizure challan, and upon such compliance, ordered respondent-authorities to release the vehicle forthwith. No costs; interlocutory applications closed.
(Mozo Tours & Travels v. State of A.P., W.P. No. 34100 of 2025, decided on 08-12-2025, per Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad, J.)

II. ANALYSIS OF FACTS AND LAW

1. Procedural Posture and Relief

The petitioner, a transport operator represented by its partner, filed the writ petition under Article 226 seeking redressal against the seizure of vehicle bearing registration number AR 01 G 5445 by transport authorities in Eluru, Andhra Pradesh.

The respondents include:

1. The State (Transport Roads & Buildings Department)

2. Deputy Transport Commissioner, Eluru

3. Motor Vehicles Inspector, Eluru

Written instructions of the Department were submitted to Court and shared with the petitioner’s counsel.

2. Factual Matrix

• Vehicle seized on 02-12-2025 at 23:04 hours while travelling from Rajahmundry to Hyderabad.

• Petitioner claims the vehicle was transiting through A.P. under an All India Tourist Permit valid from 29-11-2024 to 28-11-2025, which had expired roughly 72 hours before seizure.

• Counsel describes the lapse as pure inadvertence, not deliberate non-compliance.

The Court recorded that the prima facie materials supported the submission that the violation was unintentional.

3. Legal Framework Applied

G.O.Ms.No.285, T R & B (Tr-II), dated 15-09-1984

Counsel relied on this Government Order, and the Court expressly held that the present case is covered by it.

Compounding Mechanism

The challan issued at seizure time (23:04 hours, 02-12-2025) contained compounding fee details. The Court directed that this fee be paid.

The order thus does not adjudicate fault on merits; rather, it invokes the statutory/administrative framework permitting:

• Payment of compounding fee, and

• Release of vehicle upon compliance.

4. Court’s Reasoning

The Court noted:

• The lapse was inadvertent.

• The governing G.O. applies.

• Enforcement interest is preserved through compounding.

Accordingly, the writ was not dismissed nor allowed unconditionally; instead, the Court issued a conditional relief protecting administrative action while allowing regularisation.

III. CONCLUSION

The writ petition was allowed with directions:

1. Petitioner shall comply with G.O.Ms.No.285 dated 15-09-1984.

2. Petitioner shall pay the compounding fee noted in the challan dated 02-12-2025 (23:04 hrs).

3. Upon compliance, Respondent No.2 (Deputy Transport Commissioner, Eluru) must release the vehicle forthwith.

No costs were awarded.
All pending interlocutory applications closed.