Madras High Court
P.Selvinkumar vs The Regional Transport Officer on 19 October, 2022
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 19.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
and
W.M.P(MD).No.18177 of 2022
P.Selvinkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Regional Transport Officer,
The Regional Transport Office,
Nagercoil,
Kanniyakumari.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Aralvoimozhi Police Station,
Kanniyakumari District. ...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st Respondent
to return the Petitioner's original driving licence within a time limit that may
be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.M.Xavier
For R1 : Mr.M.Prakash
Additional Government Pleader
For R2 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
Additional Public Prosecutor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed praying for a mandamus directing the 1st
Respondent to return the original driving license No.TN7419950004161 of
the Petitioner forthwith.
2. Mr.M.Prakash, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice
for the 1st Respondent and Mr.R.M.Anbunithi, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor, takes notice for the 2nd Respondent .
3. The question that falls for consideration in this petition is as to
whether the 1st Respondent has a power to impound the driving licence of a
person involved in a road traffic accident.
4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that on 01.10.2022,
the bus, driven by the Petitioner herein, was involved in a road traffic accident
resulting in death of a person. Pursuant to which, an FIR in Crime No.295 of
2022 came to be registered by the 2nd Respondent Police for offences under
Sections 304(A) of IPC. Thereafter, on 01.10.2022, the Petitioner was
directed to appear in the 2nd Respondent Police Station with original driving
licence. On that day, the Petitioner's license was seized by the 2nd Respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
Police and handed over to the 1st Respondent. Thereafter, on 02.10.2022, the
Petitioner approached the Office of the 1st Respondent and submitted a
representation for return of his driving license, which is stated to be denied.
Hence, the present Writ Petition.
5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was
not given any show cause notice nor any enquiry conducted. The Petitioner
was not involved in any accident previously. It is submitted by the learned
counsel for the Petitioner that the question that is raised in this Writ Petition
stands resolved by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.176 of 2009 and
the said judgment is being followed consistently by this Court. It may be
relevant to refer to the following portions of the said judgment, which reads
as under:
"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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
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 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
(c) is using or has used a motor vehicle in the
commission of a cognizable offence; 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
(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 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
(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.”
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.'
6. This Court finds that inasmuch as admittedly neither any show cause
notice nor an enquiry having been made, the retention of the license is illegal,
in view of the order of the Division Bench of this Court (supra). Hence, the 1st
Respondent is directed to return the driving licence of the Petitioner, within a
week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it shall not
preclude the 1st Respondent from proceeding further with the proceedings
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
already initiated, if any of the contingencies specified in Clauses (a) to (h) of
Section 19(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has arisen or if any of the
Rules as prescribed by the Central Government in pursuance of Section 19(1)
(f) are violated.
7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
19.10.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
sn
To
1.The Regional Transport Officer,
The Regional Transport Office,
Nagercoil,
Kanniyakumari.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Aralvoimozhi Police Station,
Kanniyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
sn
W.P(MD).No.24071 of 2022
19.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
