Sreekumar R vs. The Regional Transport Officer - Kerala High Court, 27 March 2018

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1940 WP(C).No. 10127 of 2018 PETITIONER(S) SREEKUMAR R S/O. LATE RETNAMPILLAI, 50/505(1), GOWREE SANKARAM, MARUTHOORKADAVU, KALADY, KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.SRI.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENT(S): THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 001. R BY SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.RAVEENDRANATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 10127 of 2018 (M) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT OF THE JAGUAR CAR. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CARD ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT PODUCHERRY DATED 11.10.2017. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT DATED 21.08.2017 EXECUTED WITH ONE PRAVIN. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15.12.2017 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 05.01.2018. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 03.03.2018. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE GST REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE AND THE TOLL RECEIPTS. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// SD/- P.A. TO JUDGE SKS P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.10127 of 2018 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of March, 2018

J U D G M E N T Ext.P6 is a notice issued by the respondent calling upon the petitioner to show cause why tax in terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (the Act) shall not be realised from him in respect of the vehicle referred to in the writ petition. The case of the petitioner is that the vehicle is one registered in the State of Pondicherry and mainly used in the said State and as such, he is not liable to pay the tax in respect of the same under the Act. It is stated that earlier, in terms of Ext.P4 notice, the petitioner was called upon to produce documents, on the basis of which the petitioner got the vehicle registered at Pondicherry, and in response to the same, he submitted Ext.P5 reply along with supporting documents. It is stated by the petitioner that Ext.P6 notice is issued without considering Ext.P5 reply and the documents produced along with the same.

-2- The petitioner, therefore, challenges Ext.P6 notice on that ground.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.

It is seen that Ext.P6 notice is issued to the petitioner without proper application of mind. Since the petitioner was issued Ext.P4 notice earlier and since he has sent Ext.P5 reply to the said notice along with supporting documents, a notice in the nature of Ext.P6 should not have been issued to the petitioner without considering the same and after affording him an opportunity of hearing. The writ petition, in the circumstances, is disposed of directing the respondent to take a decision on Ext.P5 reply sent by the petitioner to Ext.P4 notice, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. This shall be done within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that until orders are passed as directed above, further proceedings for realization of the amounts due in respect of the vehicle shall be deferred. The -3- petitioner shall appear before the respondent for hearing on 06.04.2018. P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE. SKS