Partly allowed

Radhakrishnan.M v. the Regional Transport Officer

Madras HC19 Jan 2022WP(MD)/688/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Art. 226, the Court directed the Regional Transport Officer to return the petitioner's original driving license to him within a fortnight, despite a pending criminal FIR, while ensuring his cooperation in the investigation.

What did the court decide?

The Regional Transport Officer to return the original driving license to the petitioner within two weeks on or before 02.02.2022 after taking a written undertaking.

Radhakrishnan.M Vs the Regional Transport Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.[MD]No.688 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.01.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR W.P.[MD]No.688 of 2022

¶4

and W.M.P.[MD]No.546 of 2022

M.Radhakrishnan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Regional Transport Officer, and Licensing Authority, Transport Department, Sivakasi.

¶9

2.The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station, Sivakasi.

¶10

(Crime No.498/2021) ... Respondents

¶11

P RAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to forthwith return petitioner's original driving license bearing DL No.TN 67 Z19910002050 to him within a time limit that may be fixed by this Court.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjadkhan Government Advocate

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

***************

¶15

Mr.A.Rahul, learned counsel on record for sole writ petitioner is before this Court.

¶16

2. Learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner is working as a Driver with the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. It is submitted that on 05.12.2021, there was an unfortunate fatal accident, when the writ petitioner was behind the wheel in the course of his duty while driving a public transport bus plying between Sivakasi and Vembakottai. A First Information Report (FIR) has been registered inter alia under sections 279 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the third respondent police. This Court is informed that the matter is still at FIR stage.

¶17

3. Be that as it may, learned counsel submits that the second respondent had seized the original driving licence of the writ petitioner at the time of the aforementioned accident and the second respondent had handed over the original driving license of the writ petitioner to the first respondent. This Court is informed that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ original driving licence of the writ petitioner was issued to the

¶18

1/3

¶19

W.P.[MD]No.688 of 2022

¶20

writ petitioner on 15.10.1991 and it bears 'No.TN 67 Z19910002050 ' (hereinafter 'said DLR' for the sake of convenience and clarity).

¶21

4. Mr.T.Amjadkhan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents.

¶22

5. There is no disputation or disagreement that the captioned matter is covered by the principle laid down by a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in P.Sethuram VS. The Licensing Authority, The Regional Transport Officer, Dindigul in W.A.[MD]No.374 of 2009 authored by Hon'ble Justice V.Ramasubramanian (as His Lordship then was) presiding the Hon'ble Division Bench. This judgment is reported in 2010-Writ L.R.100 and this deals with the scope of the power of the first respondent in cases of such nature.

¶23

6. There is no disputation or disagreement before this Court that in similar matters prayers have been acceded to and that includes orders dated 30.04.2019 in W.P.No.13570 of 2019 and 10.11.2020 in W.P(MD).No.15797 of 2020 made by Honourable Predecessor Judges.

¶24

7. Learned State counsel submits, on instructions, that the matter is in FIR stage (as already alluded to supra) and prosecution will be pursued. However, there is no disputation qua the aforementioned earlier orders made by Honourable Predecessor Judges and the same having been complied with by the State without carrying the matter in appeal by way of intra-court appeals.

¶25

8. In the light of the narrative thus far, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer in the captioned writ petition viz., prayer to return the original driving licence [bearing licence No .TN 67 Z19910002050 ] of the writ petitioner can be acceded to.

¶26

9. This Court is informed that the original driving licence i.e., said DLR is now with the first respondent. The first respondent shall take necessary written undertaking, retain photocopies of the original driving licence and return the writ petitioner's aforementioned original driving licence i.e., said DLR to the writ petitioner (under due acknowledgment) as early as possible and in any event within a fortnight from today i.e., on or before 02.02.2022. The writ petitioner shall go over to the office of the first respondent on any working day in the after noon session between 02.00 PM and 04.00 PM and the original driving licence shall be handed over to him under due acknowledgment.

¶27

10. It is made clear that the writ petitioner shall produce the original driving licence as and when called for, make himself available for the criminal case to proceed and cooperate with the investigation.

¶28

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

¶29

2/3

¶30

W.P.[MD]No.688 of 2022

¶31

11. Captioned Writ Petition is disposed of in aforesaid manner i.e., with aforementioned directive. Consequently, captioned Writ Miscellaneous Petitions is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶32

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS II)

¶33

// True Copy //

¶34

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶35

¶36

NOTE: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To 1.The Regional Transport Officer, and Licensing Authority, Transport Department, Sivakasi. 2.The Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station, Sivakasi. +1 CC to M/s.A.RAHUL, Advocate ( SR-1668[F] dated 19/01/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-1897[F] dated 20/01/2022 ) W.P.[MD]No.688 of 2022 19.01.2022 MGJ(01.02.2022) 3P 5C

¶37

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

¶38

3/3

Radhakrishnan.M v. the Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Radhakrishnan.M 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

Arulmighu Kasi Vishwanathar Temple and Vs the Commissioner

Pandiyaraj.P Vs the Regional Transport Officer

M/S.Travancore Solvents and Oils Vs the Commissioner of Customs

Kongu Educational Trust, Vs the Commissioner

Lakshmiammal K.V. Vs the Joint Commissioner

Stalin.L Vs the Regional Transport Officer