Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rasid Khatri vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:44132) on 8 October, 2025
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2025:RJ-JD:44132]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19482/2025
Rasid Khatri S/o Mohammed Hussain, Aged About 47 Years,
Hardesar, Teh.- Sardarshahar, Churu, Rajasthan- 331403.
(Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj10Gb6084)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan,
Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary.
2. Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of
Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint
Secretary.
3. Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of
Rajasthan, Parivahan Bhawan, Sahkar Marg, Jaipur
Rajasthan.
4. District Transport Officer, Sujangarh, District Churu,
Rajasthan.
5. District Transport Officer, Churu, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ram Avtar Pareek.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Joshi for
Ms. Neelam Sharma.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order
08/10/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
controversy raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered
by the judgment passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9721/2025 :
Kanwar Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. (decided
on 28.07.2025). A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Jaipur in the
said writ petition after hearing the parties disposed of the writ
petition with following directions:
"11. In the considered opinion of this Court, unless and
until the allegation of overloading is established by
(Uploaded on 08/10/2025 at 04:51:41 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44132] (2 of 3) [CW-19482/2025]
physically weighing the vehicles, the registration of
subject vehicles cannot be suspended. Therefore, the
impugned orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law.
In case, it is found that there has been an alteration in
the make/design of the vehicles, it is the bounden duty
of the transport authorities, prior to passing any
suspension order, to direct the owner/driver of the
vehicles to produce their vehicles for inspection.
12. The case of the respondents is that notices were
sent to the petitioners through registered post prior to
passing the aforesaid impugned order, however, the
petitioners dispute the factum of service of notice upon
them. Under these circumstances, this Court deems it
just and proper to dispose of all these writ petitions by
issuing directions to the petitioners to produce their
vehicles before the Transport Department, who will
examine and inspect the vehicles' make and design and
in case any mechanical alteration is found, a detailed
inventory shall be prepared and appropriate orders shall
be passed strictly in accordance with law and
simultaneously, in case no alteration in the make and
design of the vehicles is found, the vehicles shall be
released forthwith. The petitioners are directed to
produce their vehicles within a period of one month
before the respective DTOs who passed the order of
suspension of registration of the subject vehicles.
13. Before parting with this order, it is made clear that
the order of suspension of registration of the vehicles
shall be passed by the Transport Department, only after
physical verification of the vehicles, including weighing
and measurements of such vehicles that too solely in
the cases where overloading is found and established
upon such verification. The registration of vehicles
should not be suspended based merely on the
allegations of over loading on the basis of data or
information received from the Department of Mines.
The respondents are further directed to grant interim
permission to the petitioners for the limited purpose of
presenting their vehicles before the respective DTOs on
a particular day. This interim period shall be valid only
for carrying the vehicles to the respective office of DTO
for the aforesaid verification/inspection and shall not
authorize the vehicles to ply on the road for any other
purpose.
14. With the aforesaid observations and directions this
batch of writ petitions stands disposed of. Stay
applications and all pending applications, if any, also
stand dismissed."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present
writ petition may be decided in the same terms as above.
(Uploaded on 08/10/2025 at 04:51:41 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44132] (3 of 3) [CW-19482/2025]
3. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed
the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, however, not in a
position to refute the fact that issue in the present writ petition is
identical to the one adjudicated in Kanwar Singh (supra).
4. In view of the submission made and in view of the order
passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 28.07.2025 in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9721/2025, the writ petition is disposed
of in the same terms as the said writ petition. The petitioner shall
make the vehicle available for physical verification before the
concerned DTO on or before 09.11.2025.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J
61-/Devesh/-
(Uploaded on 08/10/2025 at 04:51:41 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
