Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Nitai Kumar Barik vs State Of West Bengal & Ors on 2 March, 2016
Author: Samapti Chatterjee
Bench: Samapti Chatterjee
1 2.3.2016 6 W.P. 1260(W) of 2016 Nitai Kumar Barik
-vs-
State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, Ms. Ujani Pal Samanta ... for the Petitioner Mr. Amal Kumar Sen, Mr. Sabyasachi Mondal ... for the State Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, Mr. Subrata Guha Biswas ... for the State of Odisha Affidavit-in-opposition and affidavit-in-reply filed by the learned Advocates for the respective parties in Court today be kept on record.
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition assailing the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016 issued by the Assistant Secretary, STA, Odisha, Cuttack whereby the Assistant Secretary, STA, Odisha, Cuttack declined to counter-sign of the petitioner's permit on the ground as quoted below :
"Proviso to Section 41(1) of M.V. Act, 1988 provides that the vehicle should be registered in the name of one person.
You are therefore requested to intimate the PP holder to get the R.C. of WB76A-1900 corrected to match with Permanent Permit as required U/S 41(1) of M.V. Act."
Mr. Sakti Pada Jana, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, submits that proviso to Section 41(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 speaks something otherwise. Mr. Jana draws my attention to Section 41(1) proviso which is quoted below :
"Section 41(1) : An application by or on behalf of the owner of a motor vehicle for registration shall be in such form and shall be accompanied by such 2 documents, particulars and information and shall be made within such period as may be prescribed by the Central Government:
Provided that where a motor vehicle is jointly owned by more persons than one, the application shall be made by one of them on behalf of all the owners and such applicant shall be deemed to be the owner of the motor vehicle for the purposes of this Act."
Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the State of Odisha, submits that the petitioner along with the co-owner of the vehicle being No. WB-76A 1900 had applied for registration of the said vehicle in question and the Registering Authority concerned had registered the vehicle in the joint names of the owner of the said vehicle which is not permissible under the law and is contrary to the explicit provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
Mr. Jana has vehemently opposed the submissions of Mr. Deb Roy and he submits that the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016 cannot be sustained as proviso of Section 41(1) of the M.V. Act clearly provides that there is no bar to register the vehicle in the joint names.
Considering the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and after perusing the records and the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016, in my considered view, the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016 issued by the Assistant Secretary, STA, Odisha, Cuttack cannot be sustained in the facts and circumstances of the case. Therefore, the impugned order dated 8th January, 2016 issued by the Assistant Secretary, STA, Odisha, Cuttack is hereby set aside and quashed.
I direct the Secretary, State Transport Authority, Odisha to re-visit the issue involved here regarding the counter-signature of the petitioner's permit within a period of six weeks from the date of communication of this order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or his authorised representative and communicate the decision to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter.
With this direction, this writ petition is disposed of. However, there will be no order as to costs.
3
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.
( Samapti Chatterjee, J. ) AKD