- (1.) By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has sought the following relief: (i) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notice dated 06.07.2006 (contained as annexure No. 1 to this writ petition) issued by Trade Tax Officer, Trade Tax Sahayta Kendra, Naubatpur, Chandauli i.e. the respondent No. 4. (ii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release the truck No. GJ-18 T/9381 along with the goods loaded thereon and issue transit pass for the same goods. (iii) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 3 to provide the copy of trip sheet/ transit pass No. 2044 dated 07.12.2005. (iv) Issue a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order of assessment and penalty both dated 31.05.2006 (contained as annexure Nos. 3 and 4 to this writ petition) passed by Assistant Commissioner, Trade TAx, Trade Tax Sahayta Kendra, Naubatpur, Chandauli in respect of the transit pass/ trip sheet No. 2044 dated 07.12.2005. (v) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble High Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. (vi) Award cost of the petition to the petitioner.
(2.) The facts of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner's vehicle is being taken on hire by various transporters for the transshipment of goods from one place to another. During the course of transshipment of goods on 06.07.2006 when the vehicle came at the Entry Check Post of the State of U.P. i.e. the Trade Tax Sahayta Kendra, Naubatpur, the said vehicle was stopped by the Assistant Commissioner, Trade Tax, Trade Tax Sahayta Kendra, Naubatpur, Chandauli and the detention memo dated 06.07.2006 in the name of the driver of the vehicle was issued. In the said detention memo, it has been stated that certain transshipment of goods have not been got cancelled at the Exit Check Post. 3.
(3.) The contention of learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the notice does not contain the date of order of assessment and penalty and the petitioner has not been served with any notice. The order of assessment and penalty has been passed ex-parte in a mechanical manner in a printed proforma without giving any notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.;