Nithin v. The Additional Registering Authority

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 36482 of 2015 (I) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

---------------------- NITHIN DIRECTOR M/S. NENCO HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT LTD (OPC) VALAMATTOM ESTATE, RAVIPURAM, KOCHI-682 015.

BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN H.

RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. THE ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KAKKANAD ERNAKULAM-682 030.

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682 030.

3. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.T. LILLY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 36482 of 2015 (I) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------- EXT. P1 :

COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE INCORPORATION DTD.30.9.2014 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, KERALA, ERNAKULAM. EXT. P2 :

COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF VEHICLE NO.KL-27/5721.

EXT. P3 :

COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD.23.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER.

EXT. P4 :

COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.20.11.2015 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER FOR RECLASSIFYING THE VEHICLE MENTIONED IN EXT.P2 AS A CAMPERS VAN.

EXT. P5 :

PHOTOGRAPHS OF VEHICLE NO.KL-27/5721 WITH INTERIORS PROVIDED AS SPECIFIED ABOVE.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ----------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.

=========================================== W.P.(C). No. 36482 of 2015 ===================================================== Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2015

JUDGMENT

The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4 order passed by the 1st respondent on an application preferred by the petitioner for change in classification of his vehicle for the purposes of payment of tax under the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act. The grievance of he petitioner against Ext.P4 is essentially that, Ext.P4 is a non speaking order, in that it does not cite the reasons that weighed with the 1st respondent, while rejecting the application of the petitioner for a classification change in respect of the vehicle.

2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

3.

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I find from Ext.P4 order that, other than referring to various notifications issued by the Government of India as also the directions issued by the Transport Commissioner, Kerala, the order does not indicate how the aforesaid notifications and direction would operate against

-2W.P.(C). No. 36482 of 2015 the petitioner for rejecting his application for a change of classification of vehicle. I am of the view that, when an application requesting for change of classification of a vehicle is rejected by the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent should indicate as to what were the shortcomings in the application preferred by the petitioner that necessitated a rejection of the request contained therein. Inasmuch as the said exercise has not been done in Ext.P4 order, I quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to pass fresh orders in the matter, after hearing the petitioner. To enable the respondent to do so, I direct the petitioner to appear before the 1st respondent at his Office at 11 AM on 18.12.2015. The 1st respondent shall pass orders as directed, within one month thereafter.

The writ petition is disposed as above.

Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE das /2.12.15