Allowed

The Principal v. the Registering Authority

Kerala HC11 Feb 2022WP(C)/2572/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment addresses whether the petitioner must comply with AIS:052 standards for vehicles manufactured in 2016 when applying for transfer of ownership and change of class. The court directed the applicant to consider the model of the vehicles and comply with the law laid down in W. A. No. 1678/2018, denying the need for inspection as the chassis and body were unaltered, and ordered expedient

What did the court decide?

Directions to consider applications for transfer of ownership and change of class of vehicle expeditiously within one month.

The Principal Vs the Registering Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 22ND MAGHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 2572 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

THE PRINCIPAL MHES COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, VATAKARA P.O., CHERANADATHUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673 101.

¶7

BY ADVS. I.DINESH MENON M.JITHESH MENON

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY VATAKARA, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION,VATAKARA,KOZHIKODE - 673 101.

¶10

SR.G.P SRI. P.M.SHAMEER

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).28767/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶13

PRESENT

¶14

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN FRIDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 22ND MAGHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 28767 OF 2021

¶15

PETITIONER:

¶16

THE PRINCIPAL, MHES COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY VATAKARA P.O, CHERANDATHUR, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE.

¶17

BY ADVS. I.DINESH MENON M.JITHESH MENON

¶18

RESPONDENTS:

¶19

THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, VATAKARA REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE – 673101.

¶20

BY SRI.BIMAL K. NATH, SR. GOVT. PLEADER

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.02.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).2572/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶23

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) Nos.28767 of 2021 and 2572 of 2022 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 11^th day of February, 2022

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

The petitioner purchased two vehicles manufactured

¶26

in the year 2016. He submitted applications seeking

¶27

transfer of ownership and also for change of class of vehicles as an educational institution bus. Question arose as to whether compliance with the AIS standards as prescribed in Rule 125(C) of the Central Motor Vehicles

¶28

Act needs to be complied with by the petitioner or not.

¶29

Pending the writ petition, on 10.01.2022, an

¶30

order was passed by this Court directing inspection of the vehicles in question and to ascertain whether there has been any structural alterations to the vehicles.

¶31

Learned Senior Government Pleader, on

¶32

instructions, submits that there has been no alterations/rebuilding of the body of the vehicles in questions except the colour.

¶33

W.P.(C) Nos.28767 of 2021 and 2572 of 2022

¶34

-: 2 :-

¶35

In W.A.No.1678 of 2018 and connected cases a

¶36

Division Bench of this Court, interpreting Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules and the applicability

¶37

of AIS:052 to existing models of vehicles, it was held,

¶38

“We have considered the submissions of the learned Government Pleader for the appellants but, we are afraid, we cannot read Rule 125C in the manner suggested by the appellants. A mere perusal of the Rules would indicate that while Rule 125C (1) mandated that only new models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver had to have the body built in accordance with new specifications (AIS:052 (Rev-1) 2008) at the time of presentation for testing and approval for body building, the proviso to the said Rule made the requirement applicable to existing models of such buses as well, on and after 1.4.2015. In either event, the rule applied only when a new model of vehicle was presented with the chassis and a body fitted thereon or when an existing model vehicle chassis

¶39

W.P.(C) Nos.28767 of 2021 and 2572 of 2022

¶40

-: 3 :-

¶41

was presented with a new body fitted thereon. In the instant Appeals, it is the admitted case that the vehicles, in respect of which the applications for alteration of class were preferred, were all vehicles with unaltered chassis and body. In other words, it was not a case where any of the vehicles had been presented with a request for approval for a new body that was built on a chassis of an existing model of the vehicle. In our view, in such cases, where there is no replacement of the body of the vehicle with a new body, the provisions of Rule 125C (1), together with the proviso thereof would have no application. It needs to be noted further, for the sake of completion, that the amendment that was brought about through the notification dated 20.9.2016 only had the effect of removing the erstwhile proviso and substituting it with a new proviso. The new proviso only clarifies that the implementation of the revised standards, in cases of new models of bus with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver, will be done in two phases. In other words, the amendment has the effect of doing away with the necessity of compliance with the revised

¶42

W.P.(C) Nos.28767 of 2021 and

¶43

2572 of 2022

¶44

-: 4 :-

¶45

standards, so far as existing models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver are concerned. As already noted above, we are of the view that, in the case of the writ petitioners, the proviso to the unamended Rule had no application. The amendment to the Rule, therefore, did not impact them in any way.”

¶46

In the light of the law as laid down by this

¶47

Court in W.A. No.1678/2018, if there has been no replacement/ rebuilding of the body of a vehicle, the model of which is prior to 01.10.2014, the question of compliance with AIS:052 Code does not arise.

¶48

Ext.P2 and Ext.P4 applications submitted by the petitioner for transfer of ownership and change of class of vehicles respectively, are to be considered on ascertaining the model of the vehicles and in accordance with law laid down by the Division Bench as above. Let

¶49

W.P.(C) Nos.28767 of 2021 and

¶50

2572 of 2022

¶51

-: 5 :-

¶52

the same be done as expeditiously as possible and at any

¶53

rate within a period of one month from the date of

¶54

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28767/2021

¶61

PETITION	ER EXHIB	ITS
Exhibit	P1	TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE KL-13/AH.9947.
Exhibit	P2	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF MOTOR VEHICLE IN THE STATUTORY FORM SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 8.11.2021.
Exhibit	P3	TRUE COPY OF THE E-FEE RECEIPT DATED 11.11.2021.
Exhibit	P4	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.11.2021.
Exhibit	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 1015/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 24.05.2018.
Exhibit	P6	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1678/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 27.09.2018.
Exhibit	P7	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 25427/2018 DATED 26.10.2018.
Exhibit	P8	TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS. -----

¶62

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2572/2022

¶63

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶64

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF THE VEHICLE KL-60 K 2115. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP OF MOTOR VEHICLE IN THE STATUTORY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6/11/2021. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE E FEE RECEIPT DATED 17/01/2022. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF HE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6/11/2021. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.1015/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 24/5/2018. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT APPEAL NO.1678/2018 AND CONNECTED CASES DATED 27/9/2018. Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.25427/2018 DATED 26/10/2018. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C) NO.2867/2021 DATED 10/01/2022.

The Principal v. the Registering Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Principal v. the Registering Authority

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

Postal, Vs Union of India

Muhammed Rafeeq Tunelakachi, Vs Regional Transport Authority

Shaji P G Vs Additional Registering Authority

Anilkumar Vs Kerala State Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Guberalakshmi S. Vs the Branch Manager

Benny Vs State of Kerala