Madras High Court

S.Kulandairaj vs The Regional Transport Officer on 13 June, 2022

                                                                                 W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022


                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                       DATED: 13.06.2022

                                                          CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

                                                W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

                     S.Kulandairaj                                               .. Petitioner

                                                             Vs

                     1.The Regional Transport Officer,
                       The Regional Transport Office,
                       Pirattiyur,
                       Trichy District.

                     2.The Inspector of Police,
                       Traffic Investigation Wing-South Police Station,
                       Trichy.                                                   .. Respondents


                     PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to

                     issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to return the

                     driving license of the petitioner bearing D.L.No.TN-45-19880000329

                     forthwith.

                                      For Petitioner           : Mr.S.Arunachalam
                                      For Respondents          : Mr.C.Satheesh
                                                                  Government Advocate



                     1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                    W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022


                                                            ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking mandamus to direct the

first respondent to return the driving license of the petitioner bearing

D.L.No.TN-45-19880000329 forthwith.

2.The case of the petitioner is that he is a Driver of the Tamilnadu

State Transport Corporation and now, he is employed at Dheeran Nagar

Town Branch of Trichy Region. On 12.05.2022, he was allotted to work

in a bus bearing Registration No.TN-42- N-3199 and during the fourth

trip, at about 8.30 p.m, he was proceeding the bus towards Trichy

Railway Station, at that time, when the bus, after taking turn at Periyar

Statue, entered into the McDonalds road, near Junction, a lady aged

about 70 years old was walking on the right side of the road. Suddenly,

she attempted to cross the road from right side to left side, at that time,

on hearing the horn from a two-wheeler, which came behind her, she

became panic and fell on the right side of the bus. Thereafter, she was

rushed to the hospital and a case in crime No.106 of 2022 was registered

by the second respondent police for the offence under Sections 279 and

337 of IPC.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 18.05.2022, the

petitioner was directed to produce the bus for inspection before the

Motor Vehicle Inspector. On that day, the vehicle was inspected as well

as the petitioner's licence was retained by the Motor Vehicle Inspector.

Thereafter, on 20.05.2022, the petitioner approached the Office of the

first respondent and also gave a representation to return his driving

license, which was denied. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was not given any show cause notice and no enquiry was conducted. The

petitioner was not involved in any accident previously. The Motor

Vehicle Inspector can revoke or disqualify any licence issued to the

licensee only under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In this case,

none of the provisions of Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act is

attracted. Further, the petitioner was not called for any enquiry and the

retention of the licence is illegal. Due to the retention of licence by the

Motor Vehicle Inspector, the petitioner is not assigned any duty and he is

facing loss of pay. It is further submitted that a Division Bench of this

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

Court in W.A(MD) No.176 of 2009 had deprecated such act of retaining

the licence without following the procedure.

5.The learned Government Advocate for the respondents submitted

that since the petitioner is involved in a cognizable offence case, his

licence has been retained as per section 19(C) of the Motor Vehicles Act,.

6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as

the learned Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the

materials available on record.

7.Upon hearing of the learned counsels on either side, it appears

that the petitioner is a Driver of the Tamilnadu State Transport

Corporation and he met with an accident on 12.05.2022. Thereafter, FIR

was registered against him and the first respondent seized the driving

licence of the petitioner. Though the petitioner made a representation on

20.05.2022 to return the licence, the first respondent failed to return the

same.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

8. This Court finds that retention of the licence of the petitioner is

improper and without issuing any show cause notice to the petitioner, the

driving licence was seized and till date, it is retained by the first

respondent without any authority. At this juncture, this Court would like

to extract the relevant portion of the judgment of the Hon'ble Division

Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.176 of 2009 dealing with the

powers of the authorities to impound the driving licence as below:-

'5.Therefore the question that falls for consideration in this appeal is as to whether the respondent has a power to impound the driving licence of a person involved in a road traffic accident.

6.Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, empowers the Licensing Authority to disqualify a person for holding or obtaining any driving licence for a specified period or to revoke any such licence. Similarly, a Court which convicts a person for an offence under the Act, is empowered by Section 20(1) to disqualify such person from holding a driving licence for a specific period. Section 21 makes a driving licence become suspended, if the holder of the licence had been previously convicted of an offence punishable under Section 184 and a case had been registered against him on the allegation of causing the death or grievous injury to one or more persons by dangerous driving. Section 22 empowers the Court to cancel or suspend the driving licence, upon conviction of a person for an offence under Section 184.

7.Obviously, Sections 20 and 22 are not applicable to the case on hand, since the action impugned in the writ petition did not arise out of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

disqualification ordered by a Court. There is no allegation that the appellant was previously convicted for an offence under Section 184. Therefore, Section 21 also has no application to the case on hand. Consequently, the only provision to which the respondent could restore to, is Section 19.

8.Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, reads as follows:-

“19.Power of licensing authority to disqualify from holding a driving licence or revoke such lince.

(1) If a licensing authority is satisfied, after giving the holder of a driving licence an opportunity of being heard, that he-

(a) is a habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard; or

(b) is a habitual addict to any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance within the meaning of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985); or

(d) has by his previous conduct as driver of a motor vehicle shown that his driving is likely to be attended with danger to the public; or

(e) has obtained any driving licence or a licence to drive a particular class or description of motor vehicle by fraud or misrepresentation; or

(f) has committed any such act which is likely to cause nuisance or danger to the public, as may be prescribed by the Central Government, having regard to the objects of this Act; or

(g) has failed to submit to, or has not passed, the tests referred to in the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 22; or

(h) being a person under the age of eighteen years who has been granted a learner’s licence or a driving licence with the consent in writing of the person

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

having the care of the holder of the licence and has ceased to be in such care, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, make an order-

(i) disqualifying that person for a specified period for holding or obtaining any driving licence to drive all or any classes or descriptions of vehicles specified in the licence; or

(ii) revoke any such licence.

(2) Where an order under sub-section (1) is made, the holder of a driving licence shall forthwith surrender his driving licence to the licensing authority making the order, if the driving licence has not already been surrendered, and the licensing authority shall,-

(a) if the driving licence is a driving licence issued under this Act, keep it until the disqualification has expired or has been removed; or

(b) if it is not a driving licence issued under this Act, endorse the disqualification upon it and send it to the licensing authority by which it was issued; or

(c) in the case of revocation of any licence, endorse the revocation upon it and if it is not the authority which issued the same, intimate the fact of revocation to the authority which issued that licence:

Provided that where the driving licence of a person authorises him to drive more than one class or description of motor vehicles and the order, made under sub-section (1), disqualifies him from driving any specified class or description of motor vehicles, the licensing authority shall endorse the disqualification upon the driving licence and return the same to the holder.

(3) Any person aggrieved by an order made by a licensing authority under sub-section (1) may, within thirty days of the receipt of the order, appeal to the prescribed authority, and such appellate authority shall give notice to the licensing authority and hear either party if so required by that party and may pass such order as it thinks fit and an order passed by any such appellate authority shall be final.”

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

9.A bare reading of Section 19(1) shows that the Licensing Authority has the power to revoke any licence or disqualify a person for a specified period from holding or obtaining a driving licence, if any of the contingencies prescribed in Clauses (a) to (h) of Sub Section (1) of Section 19 arises. Moreover, the power under Section 19(1) can be invoked only after giving an opportunity of being heard to the holder of the licence and for reasons to be recorded in writing.

10.But in the case on hand, the licence of the appellant has been impounded or retained by the respondent, immediately after the accident on 18.3.2009. Admittedly, the show cause notice was issued only on 28.4.2009. Therefore, it is clear that the driving licence was retained, both without an order in writing and without affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. This is a clear violation of the provisions of the statute and hence the order of the learned Judge, dismissing the writ petition deserves to be set aside.'

9.On a perusal of the above judgment, it would reveal that the

Authorities have no power to impound the driving licence, but they can

take action for cancellation of licence. But, in the present case, without

issuing any show cause notice, the driving licence was impounded.

In view of the law settled by the Division Bench of this Court, this Court

is of the view that without any authority, the respondents cannot retain

the driving licence and they have to return the same to the petitioner.

Hence, this Court directs the first respondent to return the driving licence

to the petitioner on or before 17.06.2022.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.11465 of 2022

10.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

No costs.