Joyal Joseph v Regional Transport Officer (Enforcement), Regional Transport Officer (Licensing Authority), Transport Commissioner, State of Kerala, and 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. 13110 OF 2023` ## `PETITIONER:` ``` 1JOYAL JOSEPH., AGED 27 YEARS RESIDING AT ELAVUMMOOTTIL HOUSE, ASSARIKAD P.O., THRISSUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680751 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),`| |---|---| ||`CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE,`| ||`THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003`| |`2`|`REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER (LICENSING AUTHORITY),`| ||`CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE,`| ||`THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003`| |`3`|`TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,`| ||`TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD`| ||`THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014`| |`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`| ||`BY ADVS.`| ||`SRI. S MANU, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA`| ||`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.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 2 ``` ## C.S.DIAS, J. ``` ------------------------- ``` ## W.P.(C.) No.13110 of 2023 `-------------------------` Dated this the 12[th] day of June, 2023 ## JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed, interalia, to direct the first respondent to restrain the first respondent from invoking the provisions of Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989 (in short ‘Act’) and proceeding with Ext.P3 show cause notice. 2. The petitioner is a driver by profession, having Ext.P1 heavy driving license. On 22.03.2023, the petitioner was served with Ext.P3 show cause notice by the first respondent, threatening to revoke his driving license by invoking the power under Section 19(1)(d)(f) of the Act. Immediately, on receipt of Ext.P3 notice, ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 3 ``` the petitioner submitted Ext.P4 objection to the first respondent stating that he has not committed any offences and the respondents 1 and 2 have no power to suspend the license. 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.P5 order has been passed. Ext.P3 show cause notice is 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 ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 4 ``` 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 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 ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 5 ``` 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 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. 7. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record, and the rival submissions, ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 6 ``` particularly after perusing the e-challan and weighment certificate, this Court has no doubt in its mind that there is no illegality or arbitrariness on the part of the first respondent in issuing Ext.P3 show cause notice, warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Nonetheless, it will be upto the first respondent to finalise Ext.P3 show cause notice, after adverting to Ext.P4 objection submitted by the petitioner, after affording him an opportunity of being heard. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of Ext.P3 show cause notice. Resultantly, I dispose of the writ petition as follows: (i) The petitioner’s prayer to quash Ext.P3 show cause notice is rejected. - (ii) The first respondent is directed to - consider and finalise Ext.P3 show cause notice, ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 7 ``` after adverting to Ext.P4 objection submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, after affording to the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. (iii) Until such time Ext.P3 show cause notice is finalised, the second respondent shall not revoke Ext.P1 driving license of the petitioner. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- C. S. DIAS JUDGE SKP/12-06 ``` WPC No.13110 of 2023 ``` ``` 8 ``` ## `APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13110/2023` ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBITP1A TRUE COPY OF THE HEAVY DRIVING LICENSE NO.KL- 08-20140003268 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 03.03.2014 WHICH IS VALID UPTO 17.06.2026 EXHIBIT P2A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION STATUS OF VEHICLE NO.KL-08BU-7245 EXHIBIT P3A TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 22.03.2023 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT PROPOSING TO SUSPEND THE LICENSE OF PETITIONER EXHIBIT P4A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 27.03.2023 SENT BY THE PETITIONER ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST EXHIBIT.P3 NOTICE EXHIBIT P5A TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH INTERIM ORDER IN W.P. (C) NO.12402/2023 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT ON 05.04.2023 ``` ``` RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL ``` ``` TRUE COPY ``` ``` P.A. TO JUDGE ```