Abhilash C v. Regional Transport Officer (Enforcement), Regional Transport Officer (Licensing Authority), Deputy Transport Commissioner (Central Zone-I), State of Kerala, Union of India

## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ## `THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS` ``` MONDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945 ``` ## `WP(C) NO. 15592 OF 2023` ## `PETITIONER:` ``` 1ABHILASH .C AGED 35 YEARS, S/O CHAMIYAR, KUNNUMPURAM, KALLINKALPPADAM, PANNIYANKARA P.O., VADAKKANCHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678683 BY ADVS. G.HARIHARAN PRAVEEN.H. K.S.SMITHA V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR GENTLE C.D. BIJOY SAM GEORGE ``` ## `RESPONDENTS:` |`1`|`REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER (ENFORCEMENT),`| |---|---| ||`MAVELIPURAM 2ND, SEAPORT AIRPORT ROAD,`| ||`KAKKANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030`| |`2`|`REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER (LICENSING AUTHORITY),`| ||`SUB-REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,`| ||`MINI CIVIL STATION, ALATHUR,`| ||`PALAKKAD, PIN - 678541`| |`3`|`DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL ZONE -I),`| ||`CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE,`| ||`THRISSUR, PIN - 680003`| |`4`|`STATE OF KERALA`| ||`REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,`| ||`TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,`| ||`THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001`| |`5`|`UNION OF INDIA`| ||`REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,`| ||`MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY,`| ||`SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001`| ||`SRI SREEJITH V S, GOVERNMENT PLEADER`| |`THIS `|`WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON`| ``` 12.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## C.S.DIAS, J. ``` ------------------------- ``` ## W.P.(C.) No.15592 of 2023 `-------------------------` Dated this the 12[th] day of June, 2023 ## JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed to restrain the first respondent from proceeding against the petitioner on the strength of Exts.P3 and P5 notices issued under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short 'Act). 2. The petitioner is a driver by profession holding Ext.P1 heavy driving license. On 18.07.2022, the first respondent intercepted the vehicle driven by the petitioner on the ground that the vehicle was overloaded. The first respondent issued Ext.P3 show cause notice and, thereafter, Ext.P5 notice asking the petitioner why action should not be taken ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 3 ``` against him to revoke his license under Section 19(1)(d)(f) of the Act. The first respondent also filed a case before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam as S.T. No.53/2023 alleging that the petitioner has committed offences under Section 113(3)(b) read with Section 194(1) of the Act. Ext.P4 is the summons. Section 19 of the Act does not empower the Licensing Authority to suspend a driving license for violating the provisions of Section 19 of the Act. Recently, it has become a practice of the Enforcing Officers to assert the powers of the Original Licensing Authority, without territorial jurisdiction, leaving the hapless drivers remediless. In an identical situation, persons similarly situated to the petitioner had filed writ petitions before this Court and Ext.P6 order has been passed. ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` Exts.P3 and P5 notices are ex-facie illegal and unsustainable in law. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Heard; Sri.G.Hariharan, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Sreejith V.S., the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4 and the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for the 5[th] respondent. 4. Sri.G.Hariharan, argued that there is absolutely nothing on record to substantiate that the petitioner has violated the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, by carrying overload in the vehicle that he was driving, as alleged by the respondents. Therefore, Ext.P3 show cause notice is vitiated and may be quashed. 5. Sri.Sreejith V.S., on the contrary, submitted that the petitioner has deliberately not produced the e-challan that was issued by ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 5 ``` the respondents at the time of carrying out the inspection of the vehicle. It was the petitioner who handed over the weighment certificate, which clearly establishes that the vehicle was overloaded. It was on the strength of the weighment certificate that the respondents have issued Ext.P3 show cause notice. The proceedings have been initiated to revoke licenses of those drivers who violate Section 19 read with Rule 21(8) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, in the light of the direction passed by this Court in Anoop K.A. v. State of Kerala [2019 5 KHC 414] . Hence, the writ petition is to be rejected at the threshold. 6. Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the Licensing Authority, after giving holder of the license an opportunity of being heard, to revoke the license, if the license ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` holder has caused nuisance or danger to public. 7. Rule 21(8) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, unambiguously lays down that nuisance or danger to public includes carrying overload in a goods carriage vehicle. 8. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record, and the rival submissions, particularly after perusing the e-challan and weighment certificate, this Court has no doubt in its mind that there is no or illegality arbitrariness on the part of the first respondent in issuing of Exts.P3 and P5 show cause notices, warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Nonetheless, it will be upto the first respondent to finalise Exts.P3 and P5 show cause notices, after permitting the petitioner to file a reply to Exts.P3 and P5 notices and affording him an ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` opportunity of being heard. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of Exts.P3 and P5 show cause notice. Resultantly, I dispose of the writ petition as follows: (i) The petitioner’s prayer to quash Exts.P3 and P5 show cause notices is rejected. (ii) The petitioner may, if so advised, submit his reply to Exts.P3 and P5 notices to the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. (iii) If such reply is received within the stipulated time, the first respondent is directed to consider and finalise Exts.P3 and P5 show cause notices, after adverting to the reply proposed to be filed by the petitioner, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of reply submitted by the after the an petitioner, affording petitioner opportunity of being heard. (iv) Until such time Exts.P3 and P5 notices are finalised, the respondents are restrained from revoking the license of the petitioner. Sd/- C. S. DIAS JUDGE ``` WPC No.15592 of 2023 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## `APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15592/2023` ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1A TRUE COPY OF THE HEAVY DRIVING LICENSE NO. KL09 20100010227 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 20.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE RTA WADAKKANCHERRY RELATING TO VEHICLE NO. KL-08BE-3004 WHICH IS VALID UPTO 15.11.2025 EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER ON 08.03.2023 EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS RELATING TO ST NO. 53/2023 PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE SPECIAL COURT FOR CASES RELATED TO MP'S AND MLA'S AT ERNAKULAM EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.04.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED IN W.P. (C) NO.15001/2023 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT ON 02.05.2023 ``` ``` RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL ``` ## `TRUE COPY` ``` P.A.TO JUDGE ```