IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO : 16273 of 2008 Between: T.V.Prasad S/o.Appa Rao Amalapuram Depot, R/o.Amalapuram, East Godavari District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep by its Secretary to Government,Transport Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2 The Regional Transport Officer,East Godavari District kakinada 3 The Depot Manager, APSRTC,Amalapuram East Godavari District .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the impugned proceedings dated 2.5.2008 insuspending the Driving Licence of thepetitioner as illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction and set aside the same and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.M.SUBHAN Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. RAMANA WRIT PETITION NO.16273 OF 2008 ORAL ORDER: The petitioner, ﬁled this writ petition questioning the proceedings dated 02.05.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent, namely the Regional Transport Oﬃcer, Kakinada, suspending his driving licence, as illegal and arbitrary. The case of the petitioner is that he is working as Driver in the APSRTC since the last ﬁve years, and that on 02.05.2008 while he was driving the Bus, one Tata Indica Car hit the bus, and the Driver of the said Car, lodged a report before the Kattangoor Police Sation, Nalgonda District, with regard to the said accident. The petitioner states that he is not responsible for the said accident, and that Driver of the Car, who was driving the same in the wrong direction, is responsible for the accident. The petitioner further states that on the basis of the said report police report, the second respondent herein, namely, Regional Transport Oﬃcer, Kakinada, has passed the impugned proceedings dated 02.05.2008, suspending the driving licence of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the licence can be suspended only as per the provisions of Sections 21 and 22 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and that too if the licencee is charged for an oﬀence under Section 184 thereof, and since the petitioner was charged for an oﬀence under Section 337 IPC, his licence could not have been suspended. Hence, the petitioner submits that the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent, suspending his licence is illegal and arbitrary. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Transport. At the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport, the matter was adjourned four times to enable him to get instructions. Today, however, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport produced a copy of the Memo No.2376/RSC/2008, dated 06.06.2008, issued by the Transport Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, wherein he had requested all the Licensing Authorities, to issue show cause notice and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the holders of driving licence, before any action against the driving licence is taken, in view of the observations made by this Court in W.P. No.3730 of 2008 dated 28.02.2008. He further stated that the driving licence of the petitioner is still with the Regional Transport Oﬃcer, Nalgonda, and in the event any action is to be taken against the licence of the petitioner, show cause notice and reasonable opportunity of being heard would be given to the petitioner, as per the orders issued by the Transport Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in Memo No.2376/RSC/2008 dated 06.06.2008. He further undertook that he will furnish the seized original driving licence to the counsel of the petitioner. The above submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport, is placed on record, and he is directed to return the seized original driving licence to the counsel for the petitioner. In the event, the respondents intend to take any action against the driving licence of the petitioner, they shall do so only after following the procedure prescribed in the Memo No.2376/RSC/2008 dated 06.06.2008, issued by the Commissioner of Transport, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, in the light of the orders passed by this Court in W.P. No.3730 of 2008 dated 28.02.2008. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. ______________ N.V.RAMANA, J. Date: 06.08.2008 VGSR