Allowed

Mohammad Kausar Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Jan 2023WRIA/1011/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged Regional Transport Authority's decision to suspend his permit for non-payment of compounding charges without prior intimation. Court applied order from Sri Rajan Yadav to permit compounding via deposit of Rs. 5,000, ignoring the 60-day delay.

What did the court decide?

Respondent authority directed to process application for compounding subject to deposit of Rs. 5,000 by petitioner, ignoring delay.

Mohammad Kausar Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1011 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Mohammad Kausar Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Purnima Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Ms. Purnima, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, in pith and substance, the petitioner has challenged the decision taken in the meeting of Regional Transport Authority, Mirzapur (for short, "the Authority") on 17.08.2022, whereby vehicle owners mentioned therein, including the petitioner at Sl. No. 75, have been asked to deposit Rupees Five Thousand, separately, as compounding charges within sixty days and in case of default of payment within the stipulated period, their permits were directed to be treated as suspended automatically.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been made to suffer without there being any fault at his end as no intimation regarding the decision taken by the Authority has ever been communicated to him. She next submits that the decision of the Authority is, itself, in contravention of the proviso to Section 86 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 which envisages that no permit shall be suspended or cancelled unless an opportunity to furnish explanation is afforded to the holder of permit.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner in the course of her submissions has drawn the attention of this Court to an order of a coordinate Bench of this Court in a matter on identical facts in the case of Sri Rajan Yadav v. State of U.P. And 2 Others, Writ-A No. 7562 of 2022 , decided on 18.5.2022, wherein respondents have been directed to proceed further on deposit of Rupees Five Thousand in the matter of petitioner therein. She submits that similar indulgence may be accorded to the petitioner also directing the respondent authority to accept compounding charges to the tune of Rupees Five Thousand ignoring the time period of sixty days.

¶9

Learned Standing Counsel raises no objection to the aforesaid accommodation as sought for by the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances, enumerated above, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in Sri Rajan Yadav (supra). The respondent authority shall process the application for compounding subject to deposit of Rupees Five Thousand by the petitioner, in accordance with law ignoring the delay occurred therefor.

¶11

No order as to costs.

¶12

Order Date :- 20.1.2023 Bhanu

¶13

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mohammad Kausar Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Kausar Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anurag Singh Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Asad Noor Sherwani Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Majeedan Begum Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Arjun and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chhote Lal and Another Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

M/S Maa Vaishno Filling Station Rabupura Jhajhar Road and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others