Bibin M.R vs The Joint Regional Transport ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 18146 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
       FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
                             WP(C) NO. 14878 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              BIBIN M.R
              AGED 32 YEARS
              S/O. RAJENDRAN, MAKKANAL HOUSE, PAZHAYARIKANDAM P.O.,
              IDUKKI-685 606

              BY ADV P.DEEPAK



RESPONDENT:

              THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER
              (LICENSING AUTHORITY) ANGAMALY, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT
              OFFICE, ANGAMALY-683 572

              BY SMT.SHEEJA C.S., SR. GOVT. PLEADER

     THIS     WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
03.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                      SATHISH NINAN, J.
          = = = =   = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
               W.   P. (C) No.14878 of 2021
          = = = =   = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
       Dated this   the 3rd day of September, 2021

                      J U D G M E N T

Ext.P2 order, suspending the driving licence of the

petitioner for a period of 11 months and 29 days, is

under challenge in this writ petition.

2. The goods carriage driven by the petitioner was

involved in an accident, which led to the proceedings in

question. Ext.P1 is the show-cause notice issued by the

respondent to the petitioner in terms of Section 19(1)

of the Motor Vehicles Act. On receipt of Ext.P1 notice,

the petitioner submitted his explanations. Thereupon

Ext.P2 order referred to first above has been passed.

3. The challenge against Ext.P2 is on two grounds.

Firstly, that it does not reflect consideration of the

explanations offered by the petitioner and secondly,

that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of

hearing as mandated under Section 19(1). W. P. (C) No.14878 of 2021

4. A perusal of Ext.P2 order apparently justify the

contentions of the petitioner. Except for mentioning

that the explanation is not satisfactory and that the

records have been perused, there is no consideration of

the explanations offered by the petitioner. So also, it

is not in dispute that the petitioner was not heard

before passing the order. Ext.P2 needs to be interfered

with for the said reasons.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P2

order is quashed. The petitioner shall appear before the

respondent on 09.09.2021 at 11.00 a.m. for hearing on

his explanations. The respondent shall consider and pass

appropriate orders with due consideration of the

explanations offered by the petitioner. I make it clear

that I have not expressed anything on the merits.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy// P.S. to Judge APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14878/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 26.04.2021

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 13.07.2021

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2017 SCC ONLINE KERALA 23956 (2018 (1) KLT 377)

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.07.2021 ADDRESSED TO THE HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER

-----