Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Neelakanta Pilla.K vs The Additional Licensing Authority ... on 25 August, 2017

Author: Shaji P. Chaly

Bench: Shaji P.Chaly

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT:

                          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

         WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/24TH KARTHIKA, 1939

                                   WP(C).No. 36690 of 2017 (I)
                                       ----------------------------


PETITIONER :
----------------------


                     NEELAKANTA PILLA.K.,
                     S/O.LATE KRISHNADAS, AGED 49 YEARS,
                     NOW RESIDING AT ELANGAM VEEDU, 19/40-1,
                     PARASERI, CHUNKANKADAI POST, KANNYAKUMARI DISTRICT,
                     TAMILNADU, PIN-629 003.


                        BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAMACHANDRAN

RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------


               1. THE ADDITIONAL LICENSING AUTHORITY (THE JOINT RTO),
                   NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 121.

               2. THE STATE OF KERALA,
                    REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TRANSPORT,
                    GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
                    THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001

               3. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
                   TRANSPORT COMMISSIONRATE, 2ND FLOOR,
                   TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD,
                   THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

              4. THE TAMILNADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION
                  TIRUNELVELI LTD., NAGERCOIL REGION,
                  REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
                  NESAMANI NAGAR, RANITHOTTAM, NAGERCOIL,
                  KANNYAKUMARI DISTRICT, PIN-629 001.


                     R1 TO R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 15-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:
sts

WP(C).No. 36690 of 2017 (I)


                                  APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:


P1    COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENSE (NO.TN-74-19890000657) OF THE
      PETITIONER, ISSUED ON 10/06/1989.

P2    COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD (NO.10347), ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY
      TAMIL NADU STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TIRUNELVELY LTD.,
      NAGERCOIL REGION.

P3    COPY OF THE FIR NO.1630/2017, DATED 25/08/2017 OF NEYYATTINKA POLICE
      STATION.

P4    COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 25/09/2017 (NO.L5/5268/NTA/2017) ISSUED BY
      THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

P5    COPY OF THE REPLY EXPLANATION STATEMENT DATED 26/09/2017 OF THE
      PETITIONER SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

P6    COPY OF THE LICENSE CANCELLATION ORDER/PROCEEDINGS DATED
      26/09/2017 (NO.L5/5268/NTA/2017) OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:                         NIL




                                               /TRUE COPY/


                                               P.A.TO JUDGE


sts



                   SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
           ---------------------------------------
              W.P.(C). No. 36690 OF 2017
           ----------------------------------------
          Dated this the 15th day of November, 2017


                          JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a driver by profession and holding a valid driving license for operating LMV as well as HTV valid till 23.07.2019. Petitioner was issued with Ext.P4 notice apparently under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 on the basis of Ext.P3 FIR launched under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner was issued with a notice and petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 and thereafter passed Ext.P6 order, dated 26.09.2017.

2. From the pleadings as well as from the narration of Ext.P6 document, it is evident that the objection raised by the petitioner was considered and it is stated that the petitioner could not establish the defence put forth in Ext.P5 objection. Ext.P6 is an appealable order under Section 19(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and therefore the petitioner is to resort to the statutory remedy available to him under law. Even W.P.(C). No. 36690 of 2017 2 though, petitioner has a case that he was not heard properly from the records, it is evident that petitioner was heard. The other things are illegality liable to be proceeded as per the statutory provisions.

3. Therefore, if the petitioner makes any appeal before the appellate authority under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, same shall be treated as within time and pass orders, in accordance with law, after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE DCS