Partly allowed

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi v. the Transport Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, Sta, Odisha

Orissa HC16 Nov 2022WP(C)/30404/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking cancellation of a vehicle's registration certificate due to its destruction, the High Court of Orissa directed the RTO, Jharsuguda, to decide the pending application within three weeks pursuant to the Transport Commissioner's instructions.

What did the court decide?

Direction to RTO, Jharsuguda to decide the application for cancellation of registration within three weeks if the petitioner submits a proper application with certified order within two weeks.

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi Vs the Transport… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 30404 OF 2022

¶3

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. Ashok Kumar Rout, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

…. The Transport Commissioner-cumOpp. Parties Chairman, STA, Odisha and another

¶7

Mr. Pravakar Behera,

¶8

Standing Counsel, Transport Department

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

16.11.2022

This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

¶15

This writ petition has been filed for a direction Regional Transport Officer, Jharsuguda-Opposite Party No.2 to pass necessary order for cancellation of registration certificate in respect of vehicle bearing registration No.OR-23-C-9690 (Goods Career) pursuant to the application made to that effect by the Petitioner on 29^th October, 2022 (Annexure-2).

¶16

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the registration certificate of the vehicle in question has been issued in favour of the Petitioner. But in the meantime, the vehicle has been destroyed for which the Petitioner made an application (Annexure-2) for cancellation of registration under Section 55 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’), which is yet to be considered. It is further submitted that the Commissionercum-Chairman, STA, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.1, vide his

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

// 2 //

¶19

letter No.11010/TC dated 11^th December, 2020 (Annexure-1), instructed all the Transport Officers of the State to follow the procedure laid down therein for cancellation of registration certificate under Section 55 of the MV Act. It is also indicated therein that the registering authority will cancel the certificate of registration within ten days and enter the same in VAHAN application and that pendency of arrear tax and penalty under the Odisha Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975 (for short, ‘OMVT Act’) or Tax Recovery Proceeding or audit dues (IR) or VCR/ E- challan or Prosecution Report shall not be a bar for cancellation of certificate or registration under Section 55 of the MV Act.

¶20

3.1 In view of the above, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is no impediment for consideration of the application of the Petitioner under Annexure-2. The Opposite Party No.2-RTO although received the application under Annexure-2 for cancellation of registration certificate, but has not taken any action on the same. Hence, this writ petition has been filed for the aforesaid relief.

¶21

Mr. Behera, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department submits that the application submitted by the Petitioner under Annexure-2 is required to be considered keeping in mind the instructions issued by the CommissionerChairman, STA.

¶22

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merit of the application filed by the Petitioner under Annexure2, disposes of the writ petition with a direction that in the event the Petitioner makes an application in proper format along with certified copy of the order within a period of two weeks hence,

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

// 3 //

¶25

the Opposite Party No.2-RTO, Jharsuguda shall take a decision on such application for cancellation of the registration certificate in respect of vehicle bearing registration No.OR-23-C-9690 (Goods Career) in the light of the instructions issued by Commissioner-Chairman, STA-Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-1, as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three weeks therefrom and communicate the same to the Petitioner.

¶26

Issue urgent certified copy of the Order on proper

¶27

s.s.satapathy

¶28

application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi v. the Transport Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, Sta, Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi v. the Transport Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, Sta, Odisha

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

Rabindra Mohan Parida Vs Parsuram Parida

Anadi Bhanja Vs Adm, Bbsr

Sita Devi @ Sita Malik Vs Kanhu Sahoo

Satyabrata Pati Vs Ipsita Nanda

Gajendra Narayan Nayak Vs State of Odisha

Chitta Ranjan Panigrahi Vs the Transport Commissioner-Cum-Chairman, Sta, Odisha