Jai Singh S/O Shri Ram Niwas Vs State of Rajasthan

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13105/2025

¶4

Billu Ram S/o Sh Sarjit, Aged About 41 Years, R/o Nangal Mehta Kahnawas Behror Alwar Temporary - Vill - Kuhada - Post - Kalyanpura Kala Kotputli Jaipur 301703 - Owner Of Truck No. Rj.32.cg.6436 And Rj.02.gc.1995

¶5

Hakim Khan S/o Sahabuddin, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Vill - Dhauj Faridabad Hr. 121004 Owner Of Truck No. Hr.38.af.1013

¶6

Vijay S/o Hetram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 206 Gothara Mauhbatabad Pali Faridabad Hr 121004 Owner Of Truck Hr.38.ab.9953 And Hr.38.w.9953

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶10

Regional Transport Office, Sikar.

¶11

Regional Transport Officer, Alwar.

¶12

District Transport Officer, Kotputli District Jaipur.

¶13

Regional Transport Office, Bharatpur.

¶14

----Respondents

¶15

With

¶16

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13407/2025

¶17

Shimbhu Ram S/o Sh. Sarajit Singh, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 310, Nagal Mehta, Kanhawas Tehsil Behror District Alwar Ta Buchheda Mohalla Kotputali District Kotputali -Behror Raj (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Rj32Gc2744,)

¶18

Chander Shekhar Rathi S/o Sh. Ram Sharan, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Bar Gurjar (156) Sikhopur Gurugaon Haryana 122004 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr55At0084,)

¶19

----Petitioners

¶20

Versus

¶21

(2 of 11) [CW-13105/2025]

¶22

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

¶23

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶24

The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan

¶25

Regional Transport Officer Jaipur Second, District Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶26

District Transport Officer Kotputali, District Kotputali - Behror Rajasthan.

¶27

District Transport Officer Alwar, District Alwar Rajasthan. 6. Regional Transport Officer Sikar, District Sikar Rajasthan.

¶28

District Transport Officer Sikar, District Sikar Rajasthan. ----Respondents

¶29

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13653/2025

¶30

Sayed Ali S/o Rahman, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Surajpura Masuda Ajmer Raj. Owner Of Truck No.rj.36.ga.4297.

¶31

Aamna W/o Ramu Cheeta, Aged About 70 Years, Gopal Sagar, Masuda Ajmer. Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.4566.

¶32

M/s Sanwariya Mines And Minerals, Through Prop. Its Madan Singh Rawat S/o Biram Aged 54 Year R/o 2849/1 Sanwariya Khaniz Udhyog Ranisagar, Kharwa, Beawar Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.5889.

¶33

Jafri Minchem, Through Prop. Its Najbano W/o Najim Ali, Aged 63 Year R/o Plot No. 8 Radha Varlabh Area VillMasuda, Ajmer Rajasthan. Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.9259.

¶34

----Petitioners

¶35

Versus

¶36

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶37

Regional Transport Office, Ajmer.

¶38

Regional Transport Officer, Beawar.

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

(3 of 11)

District Transport Officer, Kekri.

¶43

Regional Transport Office, Rajsamand.

¶44

----Respondents

¶45

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13677/2025

¶46

Arif Khan S/o Aladeen Khan, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Jaswantpura Kharwa Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.06.gb.2901.

¶47

Sabuddin S/o Madan, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Amartpura Kharwa Masuda Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.2949

¶48

Suresh Kathat S/o Heera, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Kanakheri Masuda Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.4491

¶49

J B R Traders, Through Its Prop Nepal S/o Chotu Singh Aged 24 Years R/o Prop- Nepal, Vill Chothahri Or New Lahri, Gopal, Sagar, Gram Panchayat- Kharwa, TehMasuda Ajmer Raj. Owner Of Truck No. Rj. 36.ga.9224.

¶50

Suresh Kathat S/o Heera, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Ward No. 5 Sadu Ka Badiya Kanakheda, Kharwa Masuda Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj. 36.gb. 2373

¶51

----Petitioners

¶52

Versus

¶53

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶54

Regional Transport Office, Ajmer.

¶55

Regional Transport Officer, Beawar.

¶56

District Transport Officer, Kekri.

¶57

----Respondents

¶58

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13694/2025

¶59

Amit Kumar S/o Sh. Prakash Singh, Aged About 39 Years, R/o House Number 802, Village Gothra Mohabtabad Pali, Faridabad Haryana 121004 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr38Ah8167)

¶60

(4 of 11) [CW-13105/2025]

¶61

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

¶62

Ashok S/o Sh. Rajbir Bhadana, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Post Babain, Tehsil Ladwa, Kurukshetra Haryana 136156 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr65B6307)

¶63

----Petitioners

¶64

Versus

¶65

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶66

The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan,

¶67

Regional Transport Officer, Jaipur Second Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶68

District Transport Officer, Kotputali District Kotputali - Behror Rajasthan.

¶69

District Transport Officer, Alwar District Alwar Rajasthan. 6. District Transport Officer, Bharatpur District Bharatpur Rajasthan.

¶70

----Respondents

¶71

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13717/2025

¶72

Sanjay S/o Sh. Harchand, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Village Bar Gujjar (156) Gurugaon Haryana 122004 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr55Aj0047, Hr55Ag5547, Hr55At0647, Hr55Ak2797)

¶73

Ajit S/o Sh. Khushi Ram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village Bandhwadi Post Office Kadarpur Gurugaon Haryana 121001 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr55At2997, Hr55Ak5279,)

¶74

----Petitioners

¶75

Versus

¶76

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶77

The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan,

¶78

Regional Transport Officer Jaipur Second, District Jaipur

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

(5 of 11)

Rajasthan.

District Transport Officer Kotputali, District Kotputali - Behror Rajasthan.

¶84

District Transport Officer Alwar, District Alwar Rajasthan. 6. Regional Transport Officer Sikar, District Sikar Rajasthan.

¶85

District Transport Officer Sikar, District Sikar Rajasthan. ----Respondents

¶86

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13725/2025

¶87

M/s Kushmanda Grit Udyog, Through Proprietor Sonu Kumar Gupta S/o Sh. Vinod Agarwal Aged About 43 Years, R/o Nandrampur Bass Road, Mustil No.116, Killa No.13 Dharuhera Rewari Hr 123110 (Owner Of Truck Bearing Number Hr47G4003, Hr47G6126, Hr47G7623, Hr47G3961, Hr47G2889, Hr47E0979, Hr47E8785, Hr47D5736, Hr47D5871)

¶88

----Petitioner

¶89

Versus

¶90

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶91

The Joint Secretary, Mines And Geology Department, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan,

¶92

Regional Transport Officer, Jaipur Second, Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶93

District Transport Officer, Kotputali District Kotputali - Behror Rajasthan.

¶94

District Transport Officer, Bhiwadi District Alwar Presently District Khairthal Tijara, Rajasthan

¶95

District Transport Officer, .alwar District Alwar Rajasthan.

¶96

District Transport Officer, Shahpura District Jaipur Rajasthan.

¶97

----Respondents

¶98

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13741/2025

(6 of 11)

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

Kajim Ali S/o Mohammad Ali, Aged About 36 Years, R/o Surajpura Kharwa, Masuda, Ajmer Raj-Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36. Ga.4606

¶103

Gheesa Ali S/o Husain Ali, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Surajpura, Kharwa Masuda Ajmer Rj-Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.3286

¶104

Nepal S/o Chhotu Singh, Aged About 24 Years, R/o VillLahri Tehsil- Masuda Kharwa Ajmer Rj- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga8216

¶105

S K Kathat Through Prop. Shayar Khar S/o Bhoma Meharat, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Vill- Leheri, Tehsil Masuda Kharwa Beawar, Ajmer Rajasthan- Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.9218

¶106

Nakki Construction Company, Through Mubark Ali S/o Alanur, Aged About 47 Year R/o Kharwa Post- Masuda Ajmer Rj-Owner Of Truck No. Rj.36.ga.6277

¶107

----Petitioners

¶108

Versus

¶109

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur.

¶110

Regional Transport Office, Ajmer

¶111

Regional Transport Officer, Beawar.

¶112

District Transport Office, Kekri

¶113

Regional Transport Office, Rajsamnd

¶114

----Respondents

¶115

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13775/2025

¶116

Sahid S/o Mohammad Rafik, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Villagr Chharora Teh Tauru Mewat Hr 122105 Owner Of Vehicle Goods Carrier Registration No. Hr74B1236.

¶117

----Petitioner

¶118

Versus

¶119

State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary.

¶120

Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint

(7 of 11)

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

Secretary.

Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶126

Regional Transport Officer, Rto Bharatpur, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶127

----Respondents

¶128

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13840/2025

¶129

Jai Singh S/o Shri Ram Niwas, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Tehla (214), Mahendragarh, (Haryana.) Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj14Gq5463.

¶130

Adisal Gurjar S/o Shri Jay Kishan Gurjar, R/o Vpo Paniyala, Tehsil Kotputli, Jaipur, (Raj.) Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj32Gb8875.

¶131

Bheem Singh S/o Shri Chiman Singh, R/o 293, Dhani Darapura, Rajnauta, Kotputli, Jaipur, (Raj.) Owner Of Vehicle Registration No.rj32Gd8311.

¶132

Ramawatar Jat S/o Shri Jay Ram Jat, R/o Narsinghpura, Bas Dayal, Alwar, (Raj.) Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj32Gc9720.

¶133

----Petitioners

¶134

Versus

¶135

State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary.

¶136

Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary.

¶137

Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur, rajasthan.

¶138

District Transport Officer, Dto Office, Kotputli, District Kotputli-Behror, Rajasthan.

¶139

Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office, Jaipur (First), District Jaipur, Rajasthan.

¶140

Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office, Sikar, District Sikar, Rajasthan.

¶141

District Transport Officer, Dto Office, Jhunjhunu,

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

(8 of 11)

District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.

¶146

----Respondents

¶147

For Petitioner(s)	: Ms. Jamasi
	Mr. Kan Singh Rathore Mr. Hari Shankar Jangid Mr. Mritunjya Sharma Mr. RajKumar Saini
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Takar for Mr. S.S. Naruka,AAG

¶148

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

¶149

Judgment

¶150

11/09/2025

¶151

As the present bunch of petitions revolve around identical issues of facts and law, and the petitions herein are filed seeking analogous reliefs; and the present petitions are adjudicated by this common judgment which shall be applicable upon all the petitions connected herein on mutatis mutandis basis.

¶152

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that these petitions are filed under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek redressal of grievances arising from the arbitrary and unjust actions of the respondents. It is apprised to the Court that the primary issue herein is that the respondents have suspended the Registration Certificates (RCs) of the petitioners' vehicles/trucks, without complying with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and other allied statues. It is further submitted that the said action of the respondents violates not only the procedural requirements of the governing statues, such as issuing notices, providing adequate opportunity for hearing, or ensuring proper service of notices, but also the

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

(9 of 11)

principles of natural justice. Nevertheless, as a result of the aforementioned, hefty penalties were imposed upon the petitioners for alleged overloading, merely on the basis of thirdparty evidence, such as reports from the Mining Department, without conducting physical verification.

¶157

Learned counsel has relied upon the provisions of Sections 53, 113, 114, 194 and 200 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (primarily), along with the principles of natural justice and the General Clauses Act, 1897 qua mandatory effective service. It is submitted that if notices or orders are not served at the correct and complete addresses, the service is deemed to be defective and incomplete. Additionally, counsel has referred to provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which mandate granting threefour opportunities for hearing, and has submitted that neither of the aforementioned provisions and procedural mandates were adhered by the respondents herein.

¶158

In this regard and to substantiate the contentions made insofar learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court passed on 28.07.2025 in SBCWP No.9721/2025 titled as Kanwar Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

¶159

Per contra , learned counsel Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Takar appearing on behalf of learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. S.S. Naruka has submitted that as per the software and information provided by the Mining Department or other relevant departments, details regarding gross weight and related credentials are taken; based on which the issuance of E-Ravanna

(10 of 11)

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

and requirements are carried out. It is submitted that an assiduous analysis is conducted by the competent authorities, and after adhering with the due procedure within the prescribed upper limit, appropriate proceedings are initiated.

¶164

It is further submitted that the principles of natural justice are duly complied with in-toto, including the issuance of show cause notices, provisions of a reasonable notice period, and opportunities for hearing or grant of audience. Regarding service of notices, it is emphasized that the addresses provided in the registration certificate remains valid until amended and communicated to the relevant department. Therefore, the contention regarding defective service of notice is not tenable. Additionally, it is submitted that the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy as available under the Motor Vehicles Act, nevertheless in the petitions at hand, disputed questions of fact are involved and the writ Court ought not to entertain and adjudicate the same. Accordingly, it is prayed that these petitions should be dismissed at the threshold, due to the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy and the statutory conditions being complied with.

¶165

Having heard the contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties, taking note of the material available on record in the lead petition, and the judgments cited at the Bar, this Court without going into the arena of disputed questions of facts and merits of the individual petitions, is of a view that the impugned orders (as assailed in the respective petitions), whereby the Registration Certificates of the vehicles owned/possessed by the

[2025:RJ-JP:36914]

[CW-13105/2025]

(11 of 11)

petitioners are suspended, needs to be set aside, for the reasons that the said vehicles are the source of bread and butter of the petitioners and their families. Howsoever, the aforementioned revocation shall only be effective subject to a condition that the petitioners along with their counsel concerned shall report to/before the notice issuing authorities, on 18.09.2025, preferably in-between 11:00 am to 01:00 pm. Thereafter, due reply be filed within a period of 15 days i.e. by 03.10.2025.

¶170

Audience with respect to the same will be provided by competent authority on 10.10.2025. Adjudication of the same be carried out thereafter within a period of 15 days.

¶171

It is made clear that during the period of consideration of grievances, the RCs of the vehicles owned/possessed by the petitioners, which are suspended, shall be revoked and the status of the vehicle in furtherance to the consequential proceedings as registered and entered upon the official portal concerned, shall be updated, without further ado.

¶172

It is made clear that no prejudice will be caused to either side on account of passing of the present order.

¶173

In the light of the same, the petitions are disposed of with aforementioned directions being granted. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed.

¶174

(SAMEER JAIN),J

¶175

DEEPAK/10, 14-16, 18, 20, 23, 25, 32, 40

Jai Singh S/O Shri Ram Niwas v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Singh S/O Shri Ram Niwas v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iqbal Vs State Urban Developmentors

Maya Devi Vs the Collector Stamps Alwar and

Sanwali Devi W/O Hiralal Meena Vs State of Rajasthan

Sayed Ali S/O Rahman Vs State of Rajasthan

Jahangir Khan S/O Bhanwar Khan Vs Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited (Avvnl)

Sanjay S/O Sh. Harchand Vs State of Rajasthan