Karnataka High Court
Mr P C Hashir vs The State Government on 19 April, 2012
Author: B.S.Patil
Bench: B.S.Patil
WP.12458/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGAL ORE. DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2012, 7 | BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B ..S. PATEL. md W.P.No. 12458/2019 MYT) BETWEEN: Mr. P. C. Hashir a S/o. Kunchi Poya Cara Mckemmed . Aged about 40 years, on Permanent R/o: Zevhy; House, Kaprigudda New Road, Pandeshwar,. _ . Mangalore and also ut. oe No.202, Lalbahadur Shastri. Street, Puducherry ~ (605 002. ye ... PETITIONER (By Sri. Nishit Kemar Shetty, Adv, AND: | 1, The State Government S 'Represented. by its Secretary ; Department of Transport, Vidhana Soudha, Banga: ore. 9" The Regional Transport Officer . D. K, District, - Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada. ... RESPONDENTS
~ (By Sri. K. M. Shivayogiswamy, AGA) WP.12458/2012 This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227. of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certior: arior any other appropriate writ or direction quashing the order/challan vide Annexure-A dated 2.4.2012 issued by the 2nd. yespondent. This petition coming on for Preliminary Hearing this aay, the Court made the following: py omnis
1. Having regard to the short question involved in this writ petition, learned Additional Government Advocate is directed to take notice for the respondents, oS
2. With the. consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is s taken t up for final disposal.
3. Petitioner is the owner of Skoda Car bearing registration No. PYO} BH 3949 registered on 18.02.2011 with the RTO., Puducherry:. Petitioner claims that he has paid lifetime tax on the suid vehicle to the authorities at Puducherry. He further me * -.ciaims that he is a native of Kasargod District, Kerala State and . was not using the vehicle in question in the State of Karnataka
-- for a period more than twelve months.
ar WP.12458/2012
4. On 02.04.2012, the Officials attached to me and respondent stopped the vehicle in question and check: red the documents. It is urged that the 2nd respondent detained the vehicle in question on the ground that-the ve! hicle \ was 'found to - be flying on the public road ; in the State of Karnataka without paying the road tax. Later on, 'the vehicle came to be released | . subject to an undertaking given by the petitioner that he will pay the tax on or before 18.05.2012. ott is further urged that the 2nd respondent has impounded the RC Book of the vehicle pending payment "of tax by the . 'petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner has" approached this Court challeng: ng Anne re A check report issued in Form ~-- 27 and further seeking a direction. against the 2>4 respondent not to insist for payment of road tax for his vehicle in the State of Karnataka.
5. " Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on consideration "of the materials on record, I find that the ss "petitioner has rushed to this Court without filing objections to 'the check report. In fact, in similar circumstances, this Court _ in W.P.No.11501/2012 disposed of on 13.04.2012 referring to Section 47(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and to the i WP. 12458/2012 judgment of this Court in the case of MAHESH C.GANDHI VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONR FOR TRANSPORT, BELGAUM & ANOTHER - 2005 AIR - KANT.H.C.R. 2140, has held that the requirement on» the part of the petitioner to pay lifetime tax or.to get the vehicle . again registered in the State of Karnataka. would arise only if the vehicle in question was in-use for & period more than 12. months in the State of Karnataka.
6. As the petitioner has rushed to this Court challenging the notice issued by way of check report, the petitioner has to file objections taking up" riecessary "grounds available to him. Therefore, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to file objections within two weeks from today, "It such an objection is filed, the RTO shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in 'accordance with jaw, Until then, the vehicle of the petitioner . | shall not be seized. It will be open to the petitioner to seek return of RC Book by furnishing such security as would satisfy the 2n¥. respondent ~ RTO. If appropriate security is furnished oe "by the petitioner to the satisfaction of the RTO, the RC Book ° shali--be returned forthwith. Until the determination of the : liability of the petitioner to pay the tax, question of demanding he WP.12458/2012 payment of tax from the petitioner will not arise. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to os
- JUDGE PKS