Joint Regional Transport Officer vs Ansar T.A
2021 Latest Caselaw 4914 Ker

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                       THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI

           WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942

                        RP.No.80 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 24269/2019

     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 24269/2019(G) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA


REVIEW PETITIONER/S:

       1         JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
                 SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
                 DISTRICT-683542

       2         THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
                 CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM-682030

       3         THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
                 TRANS TOWER, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014

                 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MOHAMMED RAFIQ

RESPONDENT/S:

                 ANSAR T.A.
                 S/O.ALIYAR, 19/301, THANISSERI, WEST VENGOLA, PERUMABVOOR,
                 ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683556

                 R1 BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN
                 R1 BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
                 R1 BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SMITHA
                 R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR

OTHER PRESENT:

                 GP MOHD RAFIQ

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.02.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.P. No. 80/2020 in W.P.(C) No.24269/2019

                                     -2-




                                 ORDER

Dated this the 10th day of February 2021

Heard Government Pleader Mohammed Rafiq for review

petitioners and Adv.Sanjeev Kumar for respondent.

2. The writ petition was disposed on 05.09.2019 at the

stage of admission, on the averment made by the writ

petitioner that vehicle bearing No. KL-07-BF-9018 was

registered prior to 01.10.2017. Government Pleader Rafiq

submits that the said averment made in this behalf either is not

complete or has been stated in such a way to suit the

convenience of the petitioner. For want of notice, the

respondents could not contest this aspect of the matter. The

said omission resulted in assuming that the subject vehicle, in

fact, was registered prior to 01.10.2017. R.P. No. 80/2020 in W.P.(C) No.24269/2019

3. It is clear that the writ petition was disposed of at

admission stage and that an error which has bearing on the

consideration of the tax payable by the writ petitioner is not

decided, but the statement of petitioner is accepted. After

perusing the grounds raised in the review petition, I am

satisfied that order dated 05.09.2019 in W.P.(C) No.24269/2019,

to meet the ends of justice, is recalled and the review petition

ordered accordingly. Writ petition is restored to file.

Registry is directed to list the writ petition for admission.

Sd/-

S.V.BHATTI

JUDGE

jjj R.P. No. 80/2020 in W.P.(C) No.24269/2019

APPENDIX

RESONDENT'S ANNEXURE

R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION DETAILS OF VEHICLE NO.KL-

07BF-9018 AS ON 02.07.2007