Madras High Court

L.Vishnupriyan vs The Regional Transport Officer on 21 April, 2025

                                                                                       W.P.(MD)No.10415 of 2025

                        BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                   DATED: 21.04.2025

                                                        CORAM:

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH

                                           W.P.(MD)No.10415 of 2025


                     L.Vishnupriyan                                                         : Petitioner

                                                              Vs.


                     1. The Regional Transport Officer,
                     Regional Transport Office
                     Thanjavur.

                     2. The Inspector of Police,
                     Thanjavur Taluk Police Station,
                     Thanjavur.                                                           : Respondents

                     PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                     India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to
                     return the driving license of the petitioner bearing D.L.No. TN
                     68-20150002777 forthwith.


                                  For Petitioner      : Mr. S.Arunachalam
                                  For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jayaselan
                                                        Government Advocate for R1
                                                        Mr.K.Gnanasekaran
                                                        Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) for R2

                     1/10


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis              ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )
                                                                                        W.P.(MD)No.10415 of 2025




                                                         ORDER

The present Writ Petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing

the first respondent to return the original driving license of the petitioner

bearing No.TN 68-20150002777.

2. The petitioner’s case is that an FIR was filed in Crime No.

111 of 2025 against him for offences under Sections 281 and 106(1) of

the BNS 2023, following an accident caused by him on 01.03.2025 while

driving a bus with registration No.TN-49-BH-9766. The victim of the

accident later succumbed to the injuries in the hospital. On 04.03.2025,

the vehicle was produced before the office of the first respondent by the

second respondent. Subsequently, the license of the petitioner was seized

by the second respondent and handed over to the first respondent. The

petitioner, aggrieved by this action, has filed the present Writ Petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

the petitioner was neither given any show cause notice nor any enquiry

was conducted.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

4. It is submitted by both the learned counsel for the

petitioner, as well the learned Government Advocates appearing on

behalf of the respondents, that the short question that arises for

consideration in this petition is as to whether the first respondent has

power to impound the driving licence of a person involved in a road

traffic accident and the same stands resolved by the judgment of the

Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.176 of 2009 and the

said judgment is being followed consistently by this Court. The relevant

portion of the judgment is extracted hereunder:

"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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

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 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 licence.—(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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

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;

(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 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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

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

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),

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

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.”

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,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/04/2025 01:07:53 pm )

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.''

5. This Court finds that inasmuch as admittedly neither any

show cause notice nor an enquiry having been made, the retention of the