Kerala High Court
Gopu vs State Of Kerala on 11 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 21ST POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER:
GOPU.,
S/O GOPALAN, SAJI NIVAS,
MUDIYURVILAKKAM, ARUMANOOR,
NOW RESIDING AT THREKETTA, ELAVANMOODU, ARANGAMUGAL,
ARALUMOODU, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.-695121
BY ADVS.
V.G.ARUN (K/795/2004)
NEERAJ NARAYAN
V.JAYA RAGI
R.HARIKRISHNAN (KAMBISSERIL)
AVANEETH S.R.
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANS 695014 TOWER, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.
2 THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 6TH FLOOR, CIVIL STATION ROAD,
NEAR CIVIL STATION, KUDAPPANAKUNNU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-695043
3 JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
3RD FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER, NEDUMANGAD TOWN ROAD,
PAZHAVADI, NEDUMANGAD, KERALA 695541
SRI.JUSTIN JACOB -SR. GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Order dated 19.09.2022 of the Joint Regional Transport
Officer - licensing Authority suspending the driving licence of the
petitioner for a period of 11 months and 30 days ie., with effect
from 23.08.2022 to 22.08.2023 is under challenge in the present
writ petition.
2. Petitioner is holder of a driving licence entitled to drive
heavy vehicles along with LMV. The bus driven by the petitioner
involved in a road accident on 18.05.2022 which resulted into
registration of an FIR bearing No.524 of 2022 under Sections 279,
337, 338 and 304 A of the Indian Penal Code. The Challaning
officer referred the case to the RTO for initiation of the proceedings
under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act envisaging the
suspension of the driving licence. Accordingly, a show cause notice
dated 04.08.2022 Ext.P2 was served upon the petitioner.
Petitioner duly replied to the aforementioned show cause notice
vide Ext.P3 dated 19.09.2022, enclosed the copy of the GPS print
out of the Bus bearing vehicle ID No.16734 reflecting that the
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
vehicle was not being driven allegedly rashly and negligently as
referred to in the show cause notice and in the impugned order, in
fact it was driven at a speed of 37Km per hour. It is contended
that the impugned order do not reflect the stand taken by the
petitioner and therefore, is wholly without application of mind and
any reasons. Though the order impugned is appealable and the
remedy has been availed but it would be a farcical exercise to
proceed with the same.
3. On the other hand, learned State Counsel supported the
impugned order and states that two types of remedies cannot be
availed at the same time and therefore the writ petition is to be
dismissed with exemplary cost.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
appraised the paper book. It would be axiomatic to extract the
order impugned as well as the relevant portion of the stand taken
in the reply Ext.P3, same read as under:
Ext.P5
"In the reference 1st cited, an intimation dated the 18-May-
2022 was received from the ARUVIKKARA PS along with the
details of communication no:524/2022 committing the
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
offence DANGEROUS AND OVER SPEED DRIVING CAUSED
ACCIDENT AND ONE PERSON DIED under section 119/177
MV ACT of MV Act 1988 by the holder of Driving Licence
number KLO1 19990003991 the challaning Officer has
forwarded the licence of violator for taking suitable action
under section-19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 raad with
rule 21 of Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989.
As per the record, the driving licence No.KLO1
19990003991 had been issued to Sri.GOPU G S/D/W of
Sn.GOPALAN R/O: MUDIYOOR VILAKOM, SAJINIVAS,
ARUMANOOR, from this office as per provisions contained
under Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and rules made there under.
In this connection a show cause notice was issued to
the Licence holder that why action should not taken against
holder of the driving license u/s 19(1) of M.V Act 1988.
The Licence holder GOPU G had submitted explanation
on 23-Aug-2022.
I have perused all the records and averments came
before me and found that there is no reason to exonerate
the Driving Licence holder from the charges framed against
him and convinced that he has committed the offences as
alleged.
Therefore AJITH KUMAR VS, JOINT REGIONAL
TRANSPORT OFFICER SRTO,NEDUMANGAD, as per the
powers conferred to undersigned under Section-19(1)(d)&(f)
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 21 of Central
Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 hereby suspend the Driving
Licence of GOPU G for a period of 23-Aug-2022 to 22-Aug-
2023 (11 months and 30 days).
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
Ext.P3
The vehicle I was driving is a Leyland made bus Registration
No. KL 22 A 0096. The said bus is also fitted with GPS by
VSSC and the ID Number of the GPS fitted in the said bus is
22019930460. The vehicle of the said bus is 16734. On
receiving the information regarding the said accident, the
department/VSSC has decoded and downloaded the entire
travel history and speed of the said vehicle throughout the
entire journey. A meticulous consideration of the said
downloaded document shall convince your good office the
speed of the bus at the time in the accident took place is 37
kms per hour. Moreover, the said document would also
prove that the said vehicle throughout the entire journey
never exceeded the speed limit. It is pertinent to note that
the speed of the said vehicle is locked by the department
and the said vehicle can never exceed the speed limit of 60
kms per hour. The true copy of the said document is
annexed herewith.
The aforesaid facts shall unerringly prove the fact that
the said vehicle was never driven negligently or recklessly
and exceeding the speed limit. Moreover, the speed of the
vehicle at the time of the accident is 37 kms per hour, which
is very normal and slow. Thus I have never abridged the
four conditions mentioned above laid down by the committee
appointed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that my license
is not liable to be suspended as per law."
On con-joint reading of the stand and impugned order, it is evident
that the concerned authority did not take into consideration the
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
stand of the petitioner while passing the impugned order. The
authorities at the helm of affairs are quasi judicial and therefore
required to proceed the matter in a pragmatic and reasonable
manners, the requirement of which is evidently wanting.
Accordingly, the impugned order Ext.P5 dated 19.09.2022 is
quashed. Matter is remitted to the 2nd respondent to initiate the
proceedings under Section 19 in accordance with law and the
observation recorded herein, by affording an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner. Let this exercise be undertaken within a
period of 6 (six) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
judgment.
Writ petition stands disposed off.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL
JUDGE
nak
WP(C) NO. 30431 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30431/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.
524/2022 DATED 18.05.2022 OF ARUVIKKARA
POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RURAL
ALONG WITH - ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE
NO. C3/3991/NDD/2022 DATED 04.08.2022
ISSUED BY THE SRTO, NEDUMANGAD
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER TENDERED BY
THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON
19.09.2022
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE GPS PRINT OUT OF THE
BUS OF IIST, VSSC BEARING VEHICLE ID NO.
16734
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER PASSED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 19.09.2022 NO.
KL 21/2022/122
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED
20.09.2022 FILED BEFORE THE DISTRICT
TRANSPORT OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
UNDER SECTION 19 (3) OF THE ACT.
Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION
FILED IN EXHIBIT P6 APPEAL BEFORE THE
DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 20.09.2022
