Disposed

Mehboob Khan v. State and Ors.

Rajasthan HC4 Mar 2024CW/5355/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this D.B. writ petition, the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur disposed of the matter relying on a previous Single Bench judgment. The court quashed an impugned letter and demand notice issued under a clarification that contravened statutory rules, and remanded the matter.

What did the court decide?

Letter dated 28.07.2011 and demand notice dated 25.04.2016 quashed; matter remanded to Assessing Authority.

Mehboob Khan Vs State and Ors. — Motor Accident Claims | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:10734-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5355/2016

¶4

Mehboob Khan son of Shri Ishak Khan, by caste Musalman, aged 30 years, resident of Village and Post Berasar, Tehsil Nokha, District Bikaner.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan through the Secretary cum Commissioner, Transport Department, Sahkar Marg, Parihavan Bhawan, Jaipur. 2. The Additional Transport Commissioner (Road Safety), Govt. of Raj., Transport Department, Raj. Jaipur.

¶8

The District Transport and Taxation Officer, Nokha (Bikaner).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Rathi For Respondent(s) : Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶12

Order

¶13

04/03/2024

¶14

Dr. Praveen Khandelwal, AAG appearing on behalf of the respondents fairly submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ petition stands resolved in view of the adjudication made by a Single Bench of this Hon’ble Court in Surendra Chaudhary v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9041/2016 and other connected matters on 06.08.2018. The conclusion of the judgment reads as follows:

¶15

“In view of the above discussion, this Court finds that the very letter cannot override the statutory provisions of the Act and wipe out the exemption granted by an issuance of notification under the statute by means of a letter said to be a clarification and that too by an authority which had no

¶16

(2 of 2)

¶17

[2024:RJ-JD:10734-DB]

¶18

[CW-5355/2016]

¶19

jurisdiction. The very letter which tantamounts to rescinding the notification has been issued without complying with the mandatory provisions of Section 3(2) of the Rajasthan Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1951.

¶20

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned letter dated 28.07.2011 is set aside. The assessment order and the impugned notice dated 20.02.2015 having been passed in view of the letter dated 28.07.2011 too accordingly deserve to be set aside being both arbitrary and illegal. The matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after ignoring the letter dated 28.07.2011 which stands quashed, as above.”

¶21

Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the light of the decision rendered vide order dated 06.08.2018 passed in Surendra Chaudhary's case (supra) on the same terms, while quashing the letter dated 28.07.2011 (Annexure-10) and demand notice dated 25.04.2016 (Annexure-13), the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, while ignoring the letter dated 28.07.2011 (Annexure-10), which stands quashed above.

¶22

All pending applications also stand disposed of.

¶23

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶24

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J

¶25

90-Zeeshan

Mehboob Khan v. State and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehboob Khan v. State and Ors.

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

Narendra Kumar Choubisa Vs State of Rajasthan

Nema Ram Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jogendra @ Joga Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharampal Jat Vs State of Rajasthan

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax- Udaipur Vs M/S Saileela Synthetics Pvt. Ltd.

Manju Vs State of Rajasthan