reported in 2024 SCC OnLine Bom. 970 , a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court has interpreted Section 211 of the MV Act and has held that the said provision vests power with the Central Government to make Rules providing for levy of additional fee for processing delayed applications for certain purposes, such as, for seeking renewal of driving license, renewal of registration certificate of a vehicle, change of residence and transfer of ownership of vehicle. The Bombay High Court has, accordingly, held that levy of additional fees in this case, is in no manner a penalty, either directly or in disguise. The Bombay High Court, for reaching the said conclusion, has relied on the Supreme Court’s decisions in the case Jalkal Vibhag Nagar Nigam Vs. Pradeshiya Industrial & Investment Corporation, reported in (2021) SCC OnLine SC 960 and Sona Chandi Oal Committee and others Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (2005) 2 SCC 345 and has concluded that levy of additional fee as prescribed under the provisions of 1980 Rules cannot be said to be any kind of deterrence rather, by making the provision for consideration of delayed application for renewal of driving license, registration of certificate of vehicle etc., the CMV Rules provide a facility to the vehicle owners’ or drivers to seek renewal of registration of motor vehicle or driving license beyond the time limit prescribed for such purpose. The Bombay High Court has held in the case of K’ Savakash Auto Rickshaw Sangha (supra) that charge of additional fee is not a penalty.
