Delhi High Court
Ram Babu Mishra vs Secretary, State Transport ... on 11 September, 2009
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
13.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 8639/2009
% Date of decision : 11th September, 2009
RAM BABU MISHRA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Arvind Sah, Advocate.
versus
SECRETARY , STATE TRANSPORT
AUTHORITY GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through Mohd. Sajid, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
O R D E R (ORAL)
1. The policy relied upon by the respondent is not applicable and does
not deal with the factual background of the present case. The petitioner
had a permit to operate a three wheeler scooter in Delhi with the number
plate DL 1 RD 0648, a scooter registered in the name of the petitioner.
2. As per the petitioner on 20th August, 2008, the scooter was stolen
and FIR No. 378/2008 was filed with the Police Station Sarojini Nagar.
The police have given an untraced report stating that despite best efforts
the stolen property has not been recovered and the case has been treated
as untraced.
3. The petitioner now wants to purchase a new scooter and operate on
WPC NO.8639-2009 Page 1
the basis of the earlier permit. The respondents, however, claim that this
is not permissible as under the policy dated 17th July, 2006, permission to
register a new vehicle can be granted only on submission of proof of
scrapping of old vehicle. The petitioner obviously does not have proof of
scrapping of old vehicle, in the sense that the vehicle has been destroyed.
The petitioner has given proof that the scooter was stolen and has not
been recovered in the form of the untraced report issued by the Station
House Officer, Sarojini Nagar, Police Station. The effect and impact of the
said untraced report is that the vehicle cannot be found by the Delhi
Police. Such situation was not visualized and envisaged in the policy
decision dated 17th July, 2006. Policy decision dated 17th July, 2006 does
not specifically deal with the present situation. It does not bar/prohibit or
stipulate that permit will be issued in such situations. A pragmatic view has
to be taken, keeping in mind the object and purpose behind the policy
decision dated 17th July, 2006.
4. The object and purpose behind the policy decision dated 17th July,
2006 is to ensure that old retro-fitted two-stroke TSRs do not operate in
the National Capital Region of Delhi and these are replaced by new four-
stroke engine technology. The policy decision also seeks to regulate the
total number of three wheeler scooters in Delhi.
5. Keeping in view the object and purpose of the policy, I do not think
the scheme or the policy prevents issue of number plate DL 1 RD 0648 in
WPC NO.8639-2009 Page 2
the name of the petitioner in respect of a new three wheeler scooter. The
new registration will replace the earlier registration. The registration of
the earlier three wheeler scooter shall stand cancelled/revoked.
6. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
question whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of any subsidy on
purchase of a three wheeler scooter. It will be open to the petitioner to
make a representation in this regard and it will be open to the respondents
to accept or reject the said representation.
The writ petition is disposed of.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
SEPTEMBER 11, 2009
VKR/P
WPC NO.8639-2009 Page 3
