Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17892 of 2018 Petitioner :- Somashekar Sreeramula Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Akhilesh Kumar Pandey,A.C.Tiwari(Ac) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Vikram Nath,J.
Hon'ble Daya Shankar Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.S. Chauhan, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.07.2018, issued by the Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Administration), Jaunpur -Annexure 7 to the writ petition, whereby three directions have been issued-
(i) Petitioner may produce the vehicle in question for physical verification.
(ii) Petitioner may deposit 10% of the value of the car as tax.
(iii) Local address may be provided for registration of the vehicle.
The communication further mentions that in case the above directions are not complied with, appropriate coercive measure for recovery of the amount would be initiated.
Sri A.C. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that BMW vehicle bearing Registration No.PY-01-AZ-0099 was purchased by the petitioner in November, 2009 after obtaining financial assistance from a private financer (Annexure 4 & 5). Further case of the petitioner is that when the petitioner defaulted in making the payment to the financer, the financer got the vehicle recovered in the year 2012 and thereafter sold it to a third party. The private financer initiated arbitration proceedings against the petitioner which culminated in an award dated 25.04.2015 (Annexure -2 to the writ petition). As per the award, the claimant i.e the private financer was entitled to recover an amount of Rs.89,50,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% w.e.f. 7.12.2009 after adjusting and giving credit to any amount already deposited by the first respondent in the arbitration proceedings i.e. petitioner.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner had moved a petition before the District Court which was also dismissed on 6.6.2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to the award submitted that the fact that vehicle was recovered by the private financer in 2012 and thereafter sold to third party in 2013 are admitted. He further states that the liability as such fixed by the Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Admit), Jaunpur against the petitioner is not correct and based upon mere presumptions.
Further case of the petitioner is that petitioner had neither sold the vehicle in Jaunpur nor had ever applied for registration in the office of Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Admit), Jaunpur. Any registration may have been done by the private financer and third party who had purchased the vehicle from the private financer. Details of such persons are also mentioned in the award.
Since the matter need to be examined by the Regional Transport Officer and in writ jurisdiction we may not be in a position to examine at the first instance and without issuing notice to the private financer and the third party who had purchased the vehicle, in our considered opinion, ends of justice would be best served in case the petitioner approaches the Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Admin.), Jaunpur alongwith a representation containing all such material which the petitioner may wish to rely upon and also certified copy of this order.
We may also note here that in the order of the Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Admin.) Jaunpur, dated 10.07.2018, which is impugned in this petition, we find that copy of the said order has been marked to the private financer and they have also been held to be equally responsible and liable to comply with the directions contained in the said order.
In view of the above, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application as observed above alongwith certified copy of this order and other relevant material whereafter respondent no.3 may take appropriate decision strictly in accordance to law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned within a period of two months from the date of submission of such representation.
Till such time Assistant Regional Transport Officer (Admin.), Jaunpur takes a decision or for a period of four months which ever is earlier, no coercive measure be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned communication dated 10.07.2018.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 RPS [Daya Shankar Tripathi, J.] [Vikram Nath, J.]