Selvarajan vs Secretary Regional Transport Authority And Ors

The RTA. Malappuram, is suo motu impleaded and the directions in this judgment will be binding on the RTA Malappuram also.

Petitioner herein is the RC owner of a stage carriage bearing registration No. KL-34B 596. Petitioner procured another vehicle bearing registration No. KL -48 G 8704 in his name. The present vehicle, which is under permit, is 2011 model vehicle and the later one is a 2014 model vehicle. Hence, he applied for replacement of the earlier vehicle with the later model vehicle. When the application was submitted, the respondent insisted for clearance certificate from the financier or NOC from the concerned officer to be enclosed along with the application. Aggrieved by this, petitioner has approached this court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to section 51(6) and Section 83 of the Motor Vehicles Act and contended that both the provisions do not insist for production of NOC.

On the other hand, learned senior Government Pleader relied on Rule 174 (2) (d) which relates to the breach of the terms and conditions with respect to the application filed under section 51 (6) of the Motor Vehicles Act. Respondent has a specific contention that no such application has been filed nor such application is pending. However, the precise case of the petitioner is that though the application was tendered, it was not accepted since it was not accompanied by the NOC.

Learned senior Government pleader also submitted that, even before the date of Ext.P3 application, objection dated 1/11/2019 was received from the financier objecting to the replacement of the vehicle stating that the petitioner is a chronic defaulter and that vehicle was in their possession pursuant to the order in the arbitration proceedings. It was requested that if any application for replacement was sought for, objector shall also be given an opportunity of being heard.

Having considered the above facts, I am inclined to direct the petitioner to tender a Ext.P3 application before the respondents within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. if the above application is otherwise in order, it shall be processed and it shall be considered for replacement with specific notice to the financier. After giving notice to the objector to place on record his objection in writing,concerned respondent shall place the matter before the RTA as mentioned in the instructions given through the Government Pleader that since serious objections are there, it would be appropriate for the RTA to hear the matter. Entire procedure shall be completed by the RTA within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If the meeting could not be convened, due to reasons beyond the control of the RTA, decision shall be taken by paper circulation under section 130 of the Rules with reference to the objections raised by the financier.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.