Allowed

D.Ramesh, v. The Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC19 Apr 2017WP/9448/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed for issuance of Mandamus to return the petitioner's driving license seized during a traffic accident investigation. The Court held the seizure unjustified without a show cause notice or suspension order and directed return of the license.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to return the driving license bearing No. TN-1020020012495 to the petitioner within seven days.

D.Ramesh, Vs The Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 19.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

Writ Petition No.9448 of 2017

¶6

D. Ramesh .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.
1. The Regional Transport Officer,
The Licensing Authority,
Regional Transport Officer (South West),
Valasaravakkam, Chennai – 600 092.
2. The State rep by
Inspector of police,
Traffic investigation wing,
R-14, Pondy Bazar, Chennai South. .. Respondents

¶8

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing 1^st respondent return petitioner's original driving license bearing No. TN1020020012495.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Sudhakar
For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai,
1 & 2 Government Advocate
O R D E R

¶10

Mr.M.Elumalai, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶11

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to return the petitioner's driving license bearing No. TN-1020020012495.

¶12

Heard both sides.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

The petitioner is a driver in the Transport Corporation, Chennai. It is stated that the petitioner's driving licence was seized on 08.03.2017, in pursuant to an accident taken place and followed by the registration of FIR in Crime No.71/TN/17 under Sections 279 and 304(A) IPC. Now the petitioner seeks for return of the driving licence by contending that the respondents are not entitled to seize and retain the driving licence, simply because a criminal case is filed against the petitioner and the same is pending. It is also stated that till date, no show cause notice is issued to the petitioner. It is also stated that the respondents have not passed any order, suspending the petitioner's license also.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the Division Bench decision of this Court reported in 2010 Writ L.R. 100 (P.Sethuram vs. The Licensing Authority, The Regional Transport Officer, The Regional Transport Office, Dindigul) and a single Judge decision made in W.P.No.16958/2013 dated 01.07.2013 reported in 2013 Writ L.R.843 (S.Duraivelu vs. The Regional Transport Officer, West Thambaram, Chennai & 2 others), wherein, this Court has considered a similar issue and found that even the suspension of the license on the ground that a criminal case is pending, is erroneous. I myself followed the above decisions in similar cases, wherein licence was suspended. In this case, as it is stated that the petitioner's driving license is not suspended and that the show cause notice has also not been issued so far, I do not think that the respondents are justified in retaining the driving license of the petitioner.

¶16

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to return the driving license to the petitioner within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is needless to say, that it is open for the respondents to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law, by giving due notice to the petitioner and hearing the matter thereafter. No costs.

¶17

Sd/Asst.Registrar (CS II ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar

¶18

vsi/rkp

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶20

¶21

The Regional Transport Officer, The Licensing Authority, Regional Transport Officer (South West), Valasaravakkam, Chennai – 600 092.

¶22

The Inspector of police, Traffic investigation wing, R-14, Pondy Bazar, Chennai South.

¶23

+1cc to Mr.K.Sudhakar,Advocate sr.23453

¶24

W.P.No.9448 of 2017
nrII(co)
ss(20/4/2017)

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

D.Ramesh, v. The Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Ramesh, 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tvl.Aaraa Textiles Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

M/s.Sri Devi Vilas Kalvettu, Vs The Deputy Commercial Tax

E.Srinivasan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer

M.Ramachandran Vs The Director of Mines and

A.Madhappan Vs The District Collector

R.Thirumaran Vs The Principal Secretary to