Dismissed

Sajeesh v. the Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC23 Jan 2014WP(C)/1442/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order rejecting his vehicle registration as a private Caravan. The bench held that appeal under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act is the appropriate remedy, invoking extra-extraordinary jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to appeal under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

Sajeesh Vs the Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2014/3RD MAGHA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 1442 of 2014 (E)

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

SAJEESH

¶8

S/O.BALAKRISHNAN,” SANUBHI”, NUT STREET VATAKARA, CALICUT-673 104.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 101.

¶12

2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 1442 of 2014 (E)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM M/S.PMH MOTORS, KOZHIKODE ON 5/12/2013 IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE BEARING TEMPORARY REGISTRATION MARK NO.KL11-AX-TEM509 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING OFFICER, KOZHIKODE RELATING TO VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT P1. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE DIAGRAM OF THE SEATING ARRANGEMENT OF THE VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXHIBIT. P1. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24/12/2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.14/2013 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT MADE IN WPC NO.22234/2013 DATED 10/09/2013 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶19

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

--------------------------------------NIL

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

SMM

V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

¶25

= = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.1442 of 2014 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =

¶26

Dated this the 23^rd day of January, 2014

¶27

The request put in by the petitioner for registration of his 18 seater vehicle as a private Caravan on payment of the requisite tax has been turned down by Ext.P4 order. Ext.P4 order is assailed in this writ petition on the basis of Ext.P5 circular issued by the Transport Commissionerate. The Government Pleader contends that Ext.P5 circular applies only to a motor vehicle designed to have not more than 8 seats in addition to the driver seat.

¶28

The correctness of Ext.P4 order can be tested in appeal under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. An appeal lies against Ext.P4 order to the Deputy Commissioner wherein all the legal and factual aspects could be urged. No circumstances warranting the exercise of the extraordinal jurisdiction of this court has been made out.

¶29

I dispose of the writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner as above.

¶30

V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶31

smm

¶32

Sajeesh v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajeesh v. the Regional Transport Officer

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

Alfred Wilson Vs Federal Bank Ltd.

Beepathukutty Vs Syndicate Bank

Aleema Ameen Vs the Authorised Officer

Stephen Gomez P. Vs the Special Deputy Tahsildar (Rr)

Shiju Raj Vs the Union of India, M.G.Road Branch, Ernakulam

Bindu Xavier Vs the Authorised Officer