to a conclusion of overloading on the basis of report received from the Deputy Director Mines, Sambalpur. There is nothing to show that in coming to such a conclusion regarding overloading, any report of authorized officer of Motor Vehicle Department who conducted weighing has been relied upon. Section 114 of “the Act” empowers only the authorized officer of the Motor Vehicle Department to get a goods vehicle or trailer weighed if he has reason to believe that the same is being used in contravention of Section 113 of “the Act”. Thus, there has been violation of mandatory requirement of Section 114 of “the Act”. In such ground, the order under Annexure-3 is liable to be set aside. Though no more is required to be said in the matter, however, for the sake of completeness, this Court is inclined to scan the appellate order. The appellate authority even otherwise has gone wrong in rejecting the appeal merely on the ground that the petitioner had not obeyed the conditions imposed by him though vide order dated 23.10.2007 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No.13317 of 2007, it was directed that the petitioner may not be compelled to abide by the undertakings given by it pursuant to order dated 17.10.2007. In such background, the petitioner was not supposed to abide by the undertakings visà-vis the conditions imposed in the order dated 17.10.2007 passed by the Collector-cumChairman, Regional Transport Authority, Sambalpur (opp. party No.2) in M.V. Appeal No.03 of 2007. This shows that there has been total nonapplication of mind on the part of opp. party No.2 in rejecting the appeal. Similarly, nothing has been brought to the notice of this Court that while disposing of an appeal, the appellate authority can impose fine under law.”
