Disposed

Suryabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC25 Jan 2023WRIA/515/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging challans for vehicle overloading without deciding merits. The court directed the respondent to accept compounding charges upon deposit of Rs. 5,000 to release the vehicles.

What did the court decide?

Respondent authority directed to process compounding application subject to deposit of Rs. 5,000; vehicles to be released upon deposit.

Suryabhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 40

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 515 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Suryabhan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Vijay Tripathi,Murali Manohar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶6

By means of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the Challan No. UP566221201170811 and UP566221201171212 issued by R.T.O., Banda on 1.12.2022 on charges of overloading under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988/U.P.M.V. Taxation Act, 1997 and imposed fine of Rs. 74,100/- on Vehicle No. UP 44 T 4926 and Rs. 79,600/- on Vehicle No. UP 44 AT 8585.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is not inclined to question the validity of the order impugned whereby penalty has been imposed on the ground of overloading. He submits that some reasonable time be accorded to him so as to enable him to deposit the amount in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner in the course of his 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. He submits that similar indulgence may be accorded to the petitioners also directing the respondent authority to accept compounding charges to the tune of Rupees Five Thousand.

¶8

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

¶9

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 petitioners, in accordance with law. Subject to deposit Rs. 5,000/- by the petitioners, their vehicles may be released in their favour in case there is no other impediment.

¶10

Order Date :- 25.1.2023 A.K.Srivastava

¶11

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Suryabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suryabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shakeb Khan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Waheed Education and Charitable Trust and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shanti Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shafakat Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sharafat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Meena Vs State of U.P. and Others