Lachhman Singh v. Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.34206 of 2024 Date of Decision: 18.12.2024 Lachhman Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SANDHAWALIA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present:- Mr. P.S. Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Arundhati Kulshreshtha, AAG, Punjab.

***** G.S. Sandhawalia, J.(Oral) The petitioner seeks consideration for disposal of the legal notice dated 22.12.2024 (Annexure P-4) wherein he objects that the payment of Rs.11,000/- is violative of the scheme as the earlier fee was only Rs.1000/- for the renewal of registration and fitness certificates and thus, he has requested not to charge the penalty and the enhanced fee. 2.

We are of the considered opinion that the challenge is premature as neither any penalty has been deposited and the respondent has also not taken any action for recovery of any amount. Even otherwise, it seems that the vehicle was got registered way back on 07.04.1995 and therefore, if the registration fee has been even increased as such, which is in consonance with the statutory provisions. Merely a challenge to that NEETU RANI 2024.12.20 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD

CWP No.34206 of 2024 -2notification dated 04.10.2021, could not give a call to the petitioner to challenge the same especially, keeping in view the adverse effects of such old vehicles plying commercially and contributing to the air pollution. 3.

Resultantly, we do not seem it a fit case to issue the directions and the present writ petition is dismissed in limine. (G.S. SANDHAWALIA) JUDGE 18.12.2024 (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) neetu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether Reportable:

No NEETU RANI 2024.12.20 10:47 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment PHHC, CHD