1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.04.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.5043 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 K.Selvam : Petitioner Vs. The Regional Transport Officer and Licensing Authority, Dindigul. : Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the respondent in Se.Mu.Aa.No.21345/22/2011, dated 22.03.2011, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to return the petitioner's original driving licence. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul For Respondent : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar Additional Government Pleader ORDER Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice, on behalf of the respondent. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 3. The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition challenging the impugned order of the respondent dated 22.03.2011, in and by which, the driving licence of the petitioner was temporarily suspended from 22.03.2011 to 21.06.2011. 4. The case of the petitioner, in nutshell, is stated hereunder: (a) He is employed as driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited at its Usilampatti Depot. On 10.03.2011, when he was driving the bus, a Maruthi Omni Van came in opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bus, which was driven by him. However, a case has been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.95 of 2011 before the Inspector of Police, Vathalakundu Police Station for the offence under Section 304(A) of the Indian Penal Code. The driving licence was seized by the respondent. Since the same was not returned, he has filed a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.4499 of 2011 for a Mandamus, directing the respondent to return the driving licence. The said Writ Petition was allowed on 25.04.2011, directing the respondent to return the licence to the petitioner. However, this Court has held that a final order could be passed by the respondent under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 1988. While so, on 25.04.2011, the respondent served him an order dated 22.03.2011, wherein the driving licence was suspended for a period from 22.03.2011 till 21.06.2011. The same was served only by post on 25.04.2011. (b) From the impugned order, it could be seen that the respondent, without considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, has passed the said order. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for the reliefs stated earlier. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. 6. The driving licence of the petitioner has been suspended for a period of three months. However, from the impugned order, it could be seen that without considering the explanation offered by the petitioner, the said order came to be passed. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent is unable to point out from the impugned order that the respondent has considered the explanation that has been offered by the petitioner, while passing such order. 7. In view of the above stated position, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order of the respondent dated 22.03.2011 on the sole ground that the said order came to be passed without considering the explanation offered by the petitioner and accordingly, set aside. 8. In fine, the Writ Petition stands allowed. However, it is needless to state that the respondent is at liberty to pass orders afresh, after considering the explanation offered by the petitioner and after conducting the enquiry. It is also needless to state that the licence, which is withheld by the respondent, shall be returned to the petitioner forthwith. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Regional Transport Officer and Licensing Authority, Dindigul. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.15782 +1CC TO MR.A.RAHUL, ADVOCATE SR.15463 Sml SR : 03.05.2011 : 2p/4c : IT Order made in W.P.(MD)No.5043 of 2011 Dated:- 28.04.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/