Abdul Shafique v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPT No. 31 of 2016 Abdul Shafique S/o Shri Adbul Hakeem, Aged About 53 Years By Occupation Bus Operator, R/o Near Sahara Battery, Moudhapara, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Transport Department, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. The Transport Commissioner, Transport Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. The Regional Transport Authority, Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

4. The Regional Transport Officer/ Taxation Authority/ Registration Authority, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

5. Sher Singh Gidwani, S/o Shri Fundraj Gidwani, R/o Netaji Chouk, Katora Talab, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents ____________________________________________________________ For petitioner - Shri Brajesh Dubey and Shri Anand Dadariya, Advocate. For Respondent/State -Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 17/03/2016 1.

The instant petition is against the notice dated 17/12/2015 Annexure P-5 wherein petitioner has been served with a notice and was directed to appear before the authority on 28/12/2015. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has given the vehicle on lease to respondent No.5 Sher Singh Gidwani who was running the vehicle and as such he being in possession of the vehicle, he was liable to pay the tax.

3.

Petition as appears is against only the notice which has been served that too in the month of December, 2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to submit any fact as to whether petitioner was

represented on 28/12/2015 before the authorities pursuant to notice and outcome thereoff. Since petition is filed to quash Annexure P-5 which is only a notice wherein petitioner was required to appear before the authority on 28/12/2015 and further taking into fact that petitioner is not able to substantiate before the court as to what transpired on 28/12/2015. Apparently, it appears that petition is premature and further even assessment are made, remedy is provided to file an appeal under Section 20 of the Chhattisgarh Motoryan Karadhan Adhiniyam. 4.

In view of the above, I am not inclined to entertain this petition at this stage. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri