Remanded

Abhijeet Ghosh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC2 May 2016W.P.(C)/1593/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi allowed a writ petition challenging a suspension of driving licence for lack of hearing. It remanded the case to afford an opportunity of hearing under Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and held the impugned order in abeyance.

What did the court decide?

The petition is allowed; suspension order is kept in abeyance; case remanded for hearing and fresh order; copy to be given dasti to counsels.

Abhijeet Ghosh Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~50

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

+ W.P.(C) 1593/2016 and CM No.6890 /2016

¶4

% Date of Decision : 02^nd May, 2016

¶5

ABHIJEET GHOSH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Satyam Thareja and Ms. Shradha Karol, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rahul Mehra, Sr. Standing Counsel, Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, ASC with Mr. Aditya Swarup Agarwal and Mr. H.K. Singh, DCP, Insp. Mohaj Sinha, ASI Virendra Singh and HC Pawan

¶8

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

¶9

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

¶10

The petitioner has challenged the suspension order dated 14^th December, 2015 on various grounds, inter alia , that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner under Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

¶11

This Court has passed a detailed judgment today in W.P.(C) 2076/2016. For the reasons recorded therein, this petition is allowed and the case is remanded back to respondent no.1 for affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in terms of Section 19(1) of

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

¶14

the Motor Vehicles Act. Vide reply dated 09^th December, 2015, the petitioner had sought better particulars, namely, date, time and place of the alleged violation. Respondent no.1 shall furnish the better particulars to the petitioner within two weeks whereupon the petitioner shall submit his response to the show cause notice within a period of two weeks thereafter. Respondent No.1 shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and shall thereafter pass a fresh order which shall be communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce the original driving licence at the time of the hearing. The impugned order dated 14^th December, 2015 shall remain in abeyance and the petitioner would be entitled to drive till the fresh order is passed by respondent No.1. If the petitioner is not satisfied with the order that may be passed, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail the remedy of appeal before the appellate authority under Section 19 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶15

The pending application is disposed of.

¶16

Copy of this judgment be given dasti to counsels for the parties under signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J.

MAY 02, 2016/ dk

Page 2 of 2

Abhijeet Ghosh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhijeet Ghosh v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhdin Verma & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.

Next Radio Limited Vs Prasar Bharti & Anr.

Citizen Rights Foundation & Anr. Vs Union of India & Anr.

A.I.Metals (P) Ltd. Vs Additional Director General & Ors.

K.S.Traders Vs Union of India & Ors.

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Mangali Impex Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

D.P. Sharma Vs M/S Bses Rajdhani Power Limited

Vijay Kumar Malhotra & Ors. Vs Prateek Oberoi & Anr.

Naushaba Bano Vs Dr S Jaishankar

Ramita Mehta Vs Kunj Vihar Cooperative Group H/Society Ltd. & Ors.

Om Prakash Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Ramesh Dewan Vs Prof.Tarun Kr Das University of Delhi & Ors.

Udit Arora Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.