Disposed

Suresh Sahoo v. R.T.O., Rourkela

Orissa HC21 Jul 2022WP(C)/16035/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging notices for MV tax and penalty. Directions were issued for the petitioner to pay Rs.72,000/- within three weeks to prevent coercive action and secure issuance of vehicle permit and fitness certificate.

What did the court decide?

Directs payment of Rs.72,000/- within three weeks to avert coercive action; authority to issue permit and fitness certificate upon payment.

Suresh Sahoo Vs R.T.O., Rourkela — Banking and Recovery | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16035 OF 2022

¶2

Suresh Sahoo Petitioner

¶3

Mr. Anugraha Narayan Samantaray,

¶4

Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

R.T.O., Rourkela

¶7

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel (For Transport Department)

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

21.07.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶14

The Petitioner who is the owner of vehicle bearing Registration No.OR-14-Y-2713 challenges the notice to show cause dated 17.01.2022 vide penalty proceeding case in TRC No.4228 of 2022, notice of demand of M.V. tax and penalty amount of Rs.72,000/- dated 17.01.2022 and the Certificate of Recovery dated 17.01.2022 for the period from 1^st October, 2019 to 31^st December, 2019 in respect of the aforesaid vehicle. 3. Mr. Samantaray, learned counsel submits that the Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the Certificate amount, i.e., Rs.72,000/- as mentioned in Annexure -2 within a period of three weeks hence.

¶15

In view of the fact that the Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the outstanding tax amount of Rs.72,000/(Rupees seventy-two thousand only), this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in the event the Petitioner

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

// 2 //

¶18

deposits the aforesaid amount of Rs.72,000/-(Rupees seventytwo thousand only) within a period of three weeks hence, no coercive measure pursuant to the certificate issued shall be taken against him. On payment of the outstanding dues, the authority shall consider issuance of permit and fitness certificate in respect of the aforesaid vehicle in accordance with law.

¶19

The notice under Section 13(2) of OMVT Act, 1975 shall be replied by the Petitioner within a period of three weeks and in that event, the authority shall consider the case of the Petitioner sympathetically and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of six weeks thereafter.

¶20

¶21

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper
application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶22

Page 2 of 2

Suresh Sahoo v. R.T.O., Rourkela

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Sahoo v. R.T.O., Rourkela

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

Pitabas Barik Vs Baijayanti Barik

Surya Narayan Lenka Vs the Transport Commnr.-Cum-Chairman, Sta, Cuttack

Saira Bibi Vs R.T.O., Ganjam

Trilochan Sahu Vs R.T.O.,Angul

Muralidhar Badhai Vs State of Odisha

Gangotri Choudhury Vs State of Odisha