Snigdha Patra vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 1205 Ori

Orissa High Court

Snigdha Patra vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 10 February, 2026

Author: Murahari Sri Raman

Bench: Murahari Sri Raman

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                            WP(C) No.157 of 2026
       Snigdha Patra                           ....              Petitioner

                                    -Versus-
       State of Odisha and others              ....       Opposite Parties


      Advocates appeared in this case:
           For Petitioner       :   Mr. Akshaya Kumar Behera,
                                    Advocate
           For Opposite Party   :   Mr. Pitambar Acharya,
           No.1                     Advocate General assisted by
                                    Mr. Saswat Das, Additional
                                    Government Advocate, Mr.
                                    Debashis Tripathy,
                                    Additional Government Advocate
                                    and Ms. Aishwarya Dash,
                                    Additional Standing Counsel

           For Opposite Party   :   Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing
           No.2                     Counsel for Transport
                                    Department
                                :
           For Opposite Party       Ms. Arpita Mohapatra,
           No.4                     Advocate
                                :
           For Opposite Party       Mr. Srinivas Patnaik,
           No.6                     Advocate
                                :
           For Opposite Party       Mr. Soumya Ranjan Mohanty,
           No.7                     Advocate

                           CORAM:
                 HON' BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                             AND
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN


WP(C) No.157 of 2026                                   Page 1 of 13
                                        JUDGMENT

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date of hearing and judgment: 10th February, 2026

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HARISH TANDON, CJ.-

1. The instant Public Interest Litigation was filed by the

petitioner seeking writ of mandamus upon opposite party nos.1 and

2 to quash the notification dated 20th December, 2025 with further

direction that the authorized agency for issuance of the Pollution

Under Control Certificate should not insist for clearance of challan

pending against the particular vehicle.

2. On the last occasion, it was brought to the notice of this

Court that on the instruction of the Government, the Petroleum

Retail Outlets were refusing to vend the Petrol/Diesel on the

pretext that the challan issued against the particular vehicle has not

been cleared off. Several provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles

Rules, l989 (for short, "the Rules") were cited before this Court,

which according to the petitioner, do not contain any such

prohibitory provisions.

3. Learned Additional Government Advocate after taking an

instruction, brought to the notice of this Court that the prohibitory

order, which was issued by the Government, pertaining to the sale

of the Petrol/Diesel to a particular vehicle, over which there is

pending challan, has subsequently been revoked and/or recalled.

There is no prohibition in selling the Petrol/Diesel to the owner of

vehicle or the person who has brought the motor vehicle to the

Petrol pump for purchase of Petrol/Diesel and, therefore, the

primary grievance in the instant Public Interest Litigation has

already been meted out.

4. Though the aforesaid point became diluted on the

subsequent stand taken by the Government, the ancillary point

remained to be answered where the Pollution Under Control

Certificate is denied by the authorized agency due to pendency of

challan on the said vehicle.

5. Rule 115 of the Rules contains an exhaustive provisions

relating to the emission of smoke, vapour, etc. from the motor

vehicles to be tested and clearance certificate issued by the

Registered/authorized agent is sine qua non for plying of the

vehicle on the road. It also invites penalty to be imposed under

Rule 161 of the Rules in the event the driver or the person

in-charge of the vehicle fails to submit the certificate. Rule 167 of

the Rules assumes significance in this regard which provides for

issuance of the challan in the event of violation of any provisions

of the Act or the Rules thereunder and the mode of paying the

amount shown in the challan. There appears to be a radical change

in the said Rule 167, which stood prior to 20th January, 2026 and

the amended Rules, i.e., the Central Motor Vehicles (Third

Amendment) Rules, 2026, as stood now, is reproduced hereunder:-

"167. Procedure for issuance and payment of challan:-(1) Any police officer in uniform or any other officer, authorized by the State Government in this behalf shall issue a challan, through system either in physical or electronic form, to a person acting in violation of the provisions of the Act, or rules made thereunder.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1), in case any person who violates the provisions of the Act or rules made thereunder, the State Government can enable auto-generation of challan through electronic monitoring and enforcement system or manually by any police officer or any officer authorized by the State Government.

(3) The challan issued under sub-rules (1) and (2), shall be delivered to a person who violates the provisions of the Act, rules made thereunder, either by hand or any other physical means within a period of fifteen days, or by electronic means of communication authorized by the Central Government or State Government, within a period of three days.

(4) Details of challans issued under sub-rules (1) and (2), shall be recorded chronologically on the portal.

(5) Any person to whom a challan is issued under sub-rules (1) or (2), shall, within a period of forty-five days from the date of such issuance, either accept and pay the amount specified in the challan or contest the challan on the portal along with documentary evidence in such manner and before such authority for redressal, as may be specified by the State Government.

(6) Where a person does not contest the chalan before the authority referred to in sub-rule (5), such challan shall be deemed to have been accepted by such person on the expiry of a period of forty-five days from the date of issuance of such challan.

(7) The challan deemed to have been accepted under sub-rule (6), shall be paid, in physical or electronic form, within the next thirty days from the expiry of the period specified under sub-rule (6).

(8) Where a person contested challan before the authority referred in sub-rule (5), and is not resolved by that authority within a period of the next thirty days from the expiry of the period specified under sub-rule (5) or where such authority after hearing the submission and documentary evidences made by the person against whom the challan has been issued quashes the challan for reasons to be recorded in writing, such challan shall cease to have effect and upload order on the portal.

(9) Where the authority referred in sub-rule (5) rejects submissions made by the person against whom the challan has been issued, with reasons to be recorded in writing, the person may either pay the said challan within a period of thirty days from the receipt or uploading of such order on the

portal, or may file an application before a court after depositing fifty per cent of the amount specified in the challan in the manner as may be specified by the State Government.

(10) If the person referred under sub-rule (9), has neither paid the said challan nor contested the challan before a Court within thirty days from the date of receipt or uploading of the order on the portal, the challan shall be deemed to have been accepted and the amount mentioned in the challan shall be paid either in physical or electronic form, within the next fifteen days from the expiry of the period specified hereinabove.

(11) A notice shall be sent through electronic means every day from the expiry of the period specified in sub-rule (7) and (10).

(12) If no action is taken by the person to whom the challan is issued under sub-rule (7) and (10), in such cases, till the disposal of such challans, applications with respect to the license of offender or registration of motor vehicle, as the case may be, mentioned in the challan shall not be processed by the licensing authority or registering authority, as the case may be, except applications relating to any tax issues of motor vehicle, and such vehicle shall be flagged as "Not to be Transacted" on the portal, which shall also automatically send an intimation to the registered owner or the license holder, as the case may be, including through electronic means, till the payment of such challan, on the portal.

(13) Subject to orders of the Court, in respect of challans issued under this rule, a police officer or any officer authorized by the State Government may detail the vehicle involved in the violation of any provision of this Act or rules made thereunder."

6. On a bare reading of the provisions encompassing Rule

167 of the Rules leaves no ambiguity that in the event any challan

is issued perceiving the violation of the provisions of the Act or the

Rules, it can be generated either in the physical or in an electronic

form and the mode of payment is also indicated therein. We are

basically concerned with sub-rule (12) of Rule 167 of the Rules,

which postulates that in the event the challans are pending on the

motor vehicle after the statutory period provided in the preceding

sub-rules thereof, such vehicle shall be flagged as "Not to be

Transacted" on the portal unless the payment of such challan is

made by the person in-charge of the said motor vehicle. However,

an exception is carved out in relation to tax issues of motor

vehicle.

7. This Court deeply pondered upon such expression, i.e.,

"Not to be Transacted" in order to ascertain the intention behind

the legislative amendments to be brought in the form of new get up

in Rule 167 of the Rules. The word "transaction" in ordinary

commercial parlance connotes sale and purchase of goods, passing

of the goods from one hand to another and/or anything related to

the dealing in the goods in the commercial field.

8. We invited the attention of the learned Advocate General

as to whether such endorsement put on the portal creates any

brindle in issuance of the Pollution Under Control Certificate on

the incident of pending challan. The learned Advocate General

took us to the letter dated 3rd April, 2023 issued by the Ministry of

Road Transport and Highways, Government of India with regard to

the flagging/blacklisting of the vehicle on "Vahan portal". The said

letter was issued after embracing the technology and its

advancement in every sphere of life and launching of a portal by

giving its nomenclature as 'Vahan' to play a key role not only in

due implementation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act

and the Rules framed thereunder but also its enforcement. The first

annexure to the said letter categorises the incidence, which may

come within the ambit of the expression "Not to be Transacted" on

the said Vahan portal. Nine incidences have been notified therein,

which broadly includes-Theft of vehicle, Pending Tax/Arrears,

Government decision, Vehicle destroyed/declared total loss by the

Insurer/Accident vehicle, Loan defaulter, Vehicle confiscated,

Police case, Court case and lastly vehicle offered as

surety/guarantee against a bail bond for default of bail condition or

on demise of the owner of the vehicle, if any, legal heir(s) file a

complaint with registering authority not to transfer the ownership

of the vehicle in dispute and where challan is pending beyond 90

days and despite the expiry of period of 10 days from the date of

issuance of notice, the payment has not been made. The note

appended thereto exposits that if the challan is from the date of

issuance of notice duly served under Rule 167(6) of the Rules, the

vehicles shall be flagged as "Not to be Transacted" and the system

shall automatically generate a text message duly sent to the

registered owner or the concerned registering authority.

9. There is a gulf of difference between the incidences, which

is within the purview of a particular notion than the meaning to be

ascribed or given to such notion. Any of the incidences enumerated

in the official documents may be brought within the purview of

"Not to be Transacted", but the meaningful meaning and/or

definition to be ascribed to the word "transaction" needs a deeper

scrutiny and invite an ambiguity in its understanding. What cannot

be transacted appears to be real issue and to be given a meaning in

juxtaposition with the intention and the object to be avowedly

achieved. The pending challan may be one of the incidences,

which would come within the purview of the expression "Not to be

Transacted". However, where the transaction includes and imbibes

within itself refusal to issue the Pollution Under Control Certificate

by a Registered/authorized agency, begging an answer in the

instant writ petition in absence of any express or specific definition

assigned to "transaction" in the Act or the Rules, the general and

grammatical meaning should be given to such word or expression,

which is commonly used in an ordinary manner.

10. We are conscious that if a word or an expression has been

defined in the statute, wherever such word or expression appeared

therein, it must be assigned the same meaning. The external aid in

giving such meaning or ascertaining such meaning should be

eschewed in the event such word or expression is defined in the

definition clause/section. The power to legislate Act, Rules and

Regulation is within the exclusive domain of the Legislative

Authority and, therefore, we do not find any fetter on the part of

the Legislative Authorities to issue a clarificatory and/or

explanatory circulars/letters to render the provisions of the statute

workable in a meaningful and purposeful manner.

11. On the even date when the instant Public Interest

Litigation was taken up, the Ministry of Road Transport and

Highways, Government of India issued a clarificatory letter dated

27th January, 2026 defining the scope of the term "transaction"

appearing under Rule 167(12) of the said amended Rules. It is

highlighted that since the Pollution Under Control testing is

mandatory, any restrictive meaning to be assigned to the word

"transaction" would frustrate the very legislative intent and to

render the said provisions meaningless an/or redundant. It further

clarifies that if there is pending challan, such "Pollution Under

Control Certificate" would come within the meaning of the

"transaction". The cumulative effect of the statutory provision and

the clarificatory/explanatory letter so issued leads to an inescapable

conclusion that not only the pending challan is one of the incidence

of "Not to be Transacted" but the Pollution Under Control testing

is one of integral part of the word "transaction". The moment the

negative word is used before any specific word, it has to be

understood in the mandatory terms and, therefore, the Court should

interpret the expressions used in a statutory form, so that the

provisions would look purposeful and in tune with the true spirit

and the object underlying such incorporation. If the transaction

imbibes the Pollution Under Control Certificate and if there is a

pending challan, the prohibition created by incorporating the

negative words, appears to be a proper meaning and the intention

of the maker of the law and, therefore, we do not find any

justification in the stand of the petitioner that the

authorized/registered agency cannot deny the issuance of Pollution

Under Control Certificate on the pretext of pendency of challan on

the said motor vehicle. The Court should not issue any mandamus

upon the authorities to act either de hors the law or in

contravention to the statutory provision as the authorities must act

within the precincts of the statutory provisions and cannot be

directed to transgress such boundaries set forth therein.

12. Since the primary relief has already been redressed by the

Government in withdrawing the prohibitory order for sale of the

Petrol/Diesel on the pretext of pending challan, the other ancillary

point having addressed and/or discussed hereinabove in the manner

as would appear in the preceding paragraphs, the instant Public

Interest Litigation is disposed of.

13. As a result of the disposal of the writ petition, pending

Interlocutory Application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of, but in

the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.

(Harish Tandon) Chief Justice

(M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Odisha, Cuttack Date: 17-Feb-2026 14:01:05