Uttarakhand High Court
WPMS/1404/2018 on 20 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
ON THE 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2021
BEFORE:
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
WRIT PETITION (M/S) No. 1404 of 2018
BETWEEN:
M/s Shiv Shakti Stone Crusher. .......Petitioner
(By Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate)
AND:
State of Uttarakhand and others. ....Respondents
(By Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Additional C.S.C. for the State of
Uttarakhand)
JUDGMENT
Petitioner owns a Truck, bearing
Registration No. UA10-4674. Petitioner surrendered
permit of the said transport vehicle in the office of
Assistant Regional Transport Officer on 13.06.2014.
Since petitioner did not make any application for
extension of surrender of the transport vehicle,
therefore, he was exempted from payment of tax on
the said vehicle only for a period of three months and
he was asked to deposit the tax for the period
between 01.10.2014 to 31.12.2017, amounting to
` 74,750/-. By the order dated 10.11.2017,
impugned in the writ petition, petitioner was further
asked to deposit a sum of ` 74,750/-, as penalty.
Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached
this Court, seeking the following relief:
"(i) Issue appropriate writ, order or
direction in the nature of certiorari
quashing/setting aside the impugned order
dated 10-11-2017 passed by Respondent
no.3 (Contained as Annexure No. 4) to this
Writ Petition."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner has deposited the amount of tax i.e.
` 74,750/- pursuant to the order dated 18.05.2018,
therefore, in terms of the said order, the amount of
penalty has not been recovered from the petitioner so
far. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly
submits that petitioner is giving up his challenge to
the imposition of tax of ` 74,750/- on the petitioner
for the period 01.10.2014 to 31.12.2017, however,
petitioner is aggrieved by imposition of penalty of
` 74,750/- upon him. He submits that there is no
provision in the relevant statute for imposition of the
same amount as penalty.
3. Learned Additional C.S.C. submits that,
against the impugned order, petitioner has a remedy
of filing an Appeal. He submits that if petitioner files
such Appeal within three weeks from today, decision
thereupon shall be taken as early as possible; but,
not later than four months.
4. Having regard to the facts & circumstances
of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with
liberty to petitioner to approach the Transport
Commissioner by filing an Appeal against the order
dated 10.11.2017 passed by A.R.T.O.
(Administration), Haridwar. If petitioner files an
Appeal within three weeks from today, then the
Appellate Authority i.e. Transport Commissioner shall
consider petitioner's Appeal and take appropriate
decision, in accordance with law, as early as possible;
but, not later than four months from the date of filing
of Appeal.
5. For a period of five months or till decision
in petitioner's Appeal, whichever is earlier, the
penalty amount shall not be recovered from the
petitioner.
6. In case petitioner does not file the Appeal
within a period of three weeks from today, then the
respondents shall be at liberty to proceed against the
petitioner for recovery of the aforesaid amount.
(MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J.)
Arpan
