Kerala High Court
Dr. C.H. Moideen Kunhi vs State Of Kerala on 21 October, 2015
Author: A.M. Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2016/2ND JYAISHTA, 1938
WP(C).No. 17895 of 2016 (J)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------
DR. C.H. MOIDEEN KUNHI,
B.SC, MBBS, M.D (PED), DCH,
AGED 63, S/O. CHERIKODE MOHAMMED KUNHI,
CHERIKODE HOUSE, CHATTANCHAL,
P.O.THEKKIL, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA,
SRI.JOJO PAPPACHAN.
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
KASARAGOD.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.BOOBY JOHN.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
rs.
WP(C).No. 17895 of 2016 (J)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-
P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD FOR PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA SOCIAL JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT.
P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE FOR THE PERSONS WITH
DISABILITIES ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA HEALTH
SERVICES DEPARTMENT DATED 21/10/2015.
P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAR CARD ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA.
P4 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(MS) NO. 16/98/TRAN. DATED 31/03/1998.
P5 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O(P) 29/16 DATED 18/03/2016.
P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BOOKING FORM ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE DEALER.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
rs.
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
=============
W.P. (C) No. 17895 of 2016
===================
Dated this, the 23rd day of May, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to register his vehicle by giving exemption from payment of motor vehicles tax. Petitioner also seeks for a direction to quash Ext.P5 by which limitation has been provided to exempt vehicles having purchase value upto `5,00,000/-.
2. Ext.P5 is a notification issued by the Government exempting persons with disability from paying motor vehicles tax provided the purchase value of the vehicle is upto `5,00,000/-.
3. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that in the explanatory note, the Government had indicated that the privilege need to be given to vehicles having purchase value up to Rupees Five lakhs, which is only for the purpose of ensuring that the privilege is not misused for getting tax exemption for luxury vehicles registered in the name of differently abled persons. According to the petitioner, he has 100% disability and intends to purchase a vehicle having value of more than `20 lakhs. It is W.P(C) No.17895/16 -:2:- apparent from Ext.P5 itself that the very intention of the Government is to give some relaxation by way of tax being paid under the Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 only to a class of persons namely disabled persons. For disabled persons, another classification has also been brought in by which it is indicated that the exemption is applicable only for persons who purchase vehicles valuing up to `5 lakhs. The very purpose of relaxation is predominantly a policy of the Government and the only question is whether there is any violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Government had made it clear that the exemption cannot be extended to luxury vehicles. This appears to be a reasonable classification by limiting the exemption to vehicles having a value of less than `5 lakhs. Such policy cannot be interfered by this Court in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner apparently though a physically handicapped person capable of buying a vehicle having higher value of more than `20 lakhs, such person under normal circumstances is liable to pay motor vehicle tax and there is no reason why such relaxation should be extended to such persons. W.P(C) No.17895/16 -:3:-
I do not find any illegality or irregularity in Ext.P5 and accordingly, there being no reason to interfere with Ext.P5, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp23/05/2016 //True Copy// P.S to Judge