IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2011 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 31308 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SUBAIR, S/O. ABDUL AZEEZ, VELUTHAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULLIPARAMBA P.O., CHELEMBRA, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM-676 505. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 31308/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE INVENTORY OF THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICTION FOR REPLACEMENT WITH CHALAN DTD. 1.10.2011. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.11503/2005 DTD.29.6.2005. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL /True Copy/ vps PA to Judge P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 31308 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of a stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-7 AE 2190. He also holds a regular permit to operate a stage carriage on the route Hiros Nagar-Alingal Beach. A copy thereof is produced as Ext.P1. It is stated that the vehicle was garaged after intimation in “Form G”, prescribed under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976, was given to the respondent herein and while it was garaged, it was seized and taken away by the financier on 17.5.2011. The petitioner states that though he had applied for replacement of the vehicle by submitting Ext.P3 application on 11.10.2011, the respondent declined to entertain the application on the ground that the petitioner has not produced the registration particulars of the outgoing vehicle. Relying on the decision of this Court in W.P.(C) No.10812 of 2007 it is contended that to replace an outgoing vehicle with a later model vehicle it is not necessary to produce the current records of the outgoing vehicle. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, Smt.Anitha Ravindran, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that besides the fact that the petitioner has not WPC No.31308/2011 2 produced the current records of the outgoing vehicle, he is also liable to pay motor vehicles tax from 1.1.2011 in respect of the outgoing vehicle and that was the reason why the respondent did not pass orders on Ext.P3. Faced with that situation, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he had given periodical intimations in “Form G” prescribed under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 to the respondent and that it was while the vehicle was thus garaged that it was seized and taken away by he financier on 17.5.2011 and that in view of such seizure, on inspection by the officers of the department, the vehicle was not found in the place where it was stated to be garaged in the intimation given in “Form G”. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to pay the motor vehicles tax for the period from 1.1.2011 till 31.12.2011 under protest subject to the outcome of the enquiry if any being conducted by the respondent to ascertain the genuineness of the intimation in “Form G” given by the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent did not oppose the said submission. In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition with the direction that in the event of the petitioner remitting under protest the entire amount of tax payable by him in respect of the outgoing vehicle WPC No.31308/2011 3 for the period from 1.1.2011 to 31.12.2011, the respondent shall, without insisting on the production of the current records of the outgoing vehicle, consider Ext.P3 application for replacement and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within one week from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him. Needless to say if after enquiry the respondent is satisfied that the vehicle was garaged ever since 1.1.2011 and after intimation in “Form G” was given and it was seized and removed by the financier from the place where it was garaged, the petitioner will be entitled to refund of the tax paid under protest. In the event of the application for replacement being granted, the endorsement in that regard shall be made on the original of the permit forthwith. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.31308/2011 4