Allowed

M/S Pipar Parivahan Fitness Center v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC2 Dec 2019SAW/1395/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan allowed an appeal challenging a single judge order under the Fitness of Insurance Vehicle Act. It granted the petitioner two months to upgrade facilities and directed RTOs to reject non-accredited fitness certificates even within ten miles radius.

What did the court decide?

Granted two months further time to upgrade facility in conformity with scheme FIJA2018 and to make necessary application to appropriate authority.

M/S Pipar Parivahan Fitness Center Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

¶2

D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 1395/2019

¶3

M/s Pipar Parivahan Fitness Center

----Appellant

Versus

State Of Rajasthan

----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr.Hapu Ram Bishnoi For Respondent(s) : Mr.Sunil Beniwal, A.A.G.

¶9

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. INDRAJIT MAHANTY HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶10

Order

¶11

02/12/2019

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶13

Learned counsel for the appellants has sought to challenge judgment and order dated 12.09.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in the present appeal.

¶14

After perusing the judgment and order, we find no reasons to interfere with the same. However, considering the fact that the petitioner had been granted a license to operate a fitness center under the FIJA-2011 scheme, he be granted two months’ further time to upgrade his facility and to comply with the scheme FIJA2018 and then to make necessary application to the appropriate authority. The appropriate authority shall do well to consider the same and grant license to the petitioner at the earliest.

¶15

Learned Additional Advocate General submits that a notification has been issued by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Authority stating that, if no accredited fitness center is available within ten miles radius, the vehicle shall be produced

¶16

[SAW-1395/2019]

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

before the concerned RTO for issue of fitness certificate. We fail to understand how an RTO can grant fitness certificate, when such officers of the RTO do not possess the necessary equipments for verification of the same.

¶19

Accordingly, we direct that the concerned RTO shall act only upon accredited fitness certificate granted by the authorized licensees alone, even if the distance is more than 10 Kilometers from the location of the RTO office.

¶20

The petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶21

(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J (INDRAJIT MAHANTY),CJ

¶22

S-49-Kshama Dixit/-

M/S Pipar Parivahan Fitness Center v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Pipar Parivahan Fitness Center v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hukmi Chand Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanwar Singh Rathore Vs Rajasthan State Road Development and Construction Corporation Ltd.

Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan

Shafi Mohd. Mehar Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Ob Singh

M/S. Marwar Fitness Center Vs State of Rajasthan