Allahabad High Court
Surendra Kumar Yadav vs Regional Transport Authority on 3 January, 2023
Bench: Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 40 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 22239 of 2022 Petitioner :- Surendra Kumar Yadav Respondent :- Regional Transport Authority Counsel for Petitioner :- Purnima Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Ms. Purnima, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Hari Mohan Srivastava, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
By means of present writ petition, in pith and substance, the petitioner has challenged the decision taken in the meeting of Regional Transport Authority, Mirzapur (for short, "the Authority") on 17.8.2022, whereby vehicle owners mentioned therein, including the petitioner at Sl. No. 68, have been asked to deposit Rupees Five Thousand, separately, as compounding charges within sixty days and in case of default of payment within the stipulated period, their permits were directed to be treated as suspended automatically.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made to suffer without there being any fault at his end as no intimation regarding the decision taken by the Authority has ever been communicated to him. She next submits that the decision of the Authority is, itself, in contravention of the proviso to Section 86 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 which envisages that no permit shall be suspended or cancelled unless an opportunity to furnish explanation is afforded to the holder of permit.
Learned counsel for the petitioner in the course of her submissions has drawn the attention of this Court to an order of a coordinate Bench of this Court in a matter on identical facts in the case of Sri Rajan Yadav v. State of U.P. And 2 Others, Writ-A No. 7562 of 2022, decided on 18.5.2022, wherein respondents have been directed to proceed further on deposit of Rupees Five Thousand in the matter of petitioner therein. She submits that similar indulgence may be accorded to the petitioner also directing the respondent authority to accept compounding charges to the tune of Rupees Five Thousand ignoring the time period of sixty days.
Learned Standing Counsel raises no objection to the aforesaid accommodation as sought for by the petitioner.
Considering the facts and circumstances, enumerated above, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in Sri Rajan Yadav (supra). The respondent authority shall process the application for compounding subject to deposit of Rupees Five Thousand by the petitioner, in accordance with law ignoring the delay occurred therefor.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 3.1.2023 DS