SK, J Tarachand Logistic Solutions Limited v. State of Andhra Pradesh I and requested to set aside the irnpugned Demand Notice

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondeits in requiring the petitioner to pay life tax along with applicable penalty and compounding fee for the 27 forklifts operated by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional and contrary to the provisions of the Central Motor Vehicles Act 1988 Central Motor Vehicles rules,1989 and Andhra Pradesh ltlotor.!ehicles Taxation Act, 1963 and set aside the demand notice dated 16.8.2011 and consequently direct the respondents not to insist the petitioner to register the forklifts operated by the petitioner under the said legislations or to remit any amounts towards life tax and /or penalties and compounding fee under the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963. l.A. NO: { 2011(WP MP. NO: 31356 OF 20111 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to insist for registration of the forklifts operated by the petitioner at its factory in Pothireddypally Ranga Reddy district, under the Central Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and payment of life tax with applicable penalties and compounding fees contemplated under the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act,1963 pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N.NAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR TRANSPORT The Court made the following: ORDER I I W.P.No.25467 of 20LI SK, J THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SARATH WRIT PETITION No.25467 of 2011 ORDER: . This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondents in requiring the petitioner to pay life tax along with applicable penalty and compounding fee for t:ne 27 forklifts operated by the petitioner as illegal and arbitrary and to set aside the Demand Notice dated 16.08.201 I and consequently direct the respondents not to insist the petitioner to register the forklifts operated by it under the said legislations or to remit any amounts towards life tax and/or penalties and compounding fee under the Telangana Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963. I

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport for the respondents and perused the entire material on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2 W.P.No.25467 of 2011 SK, J Tarachand Logistic Solutions Limited vs State of Andhra Pradesh I and requested to set aside the irnpugned Demand Notice dated 16.08.201 1.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Transport has not disputed the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner

5. The relevant portion in para Nos.46 and 47 of the Judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in Tarachand Logistic Solutions Limited's case (1 supra) is as under: " 46. Motor vehicle tax is compensatory in nattrro. It has a direct nexus with the end use. The rationalc lor levy of motor vehicle tax is that a person who is using public infrastructure, such as, roads, highways etc. has to pay for such usage. Legislature has consciously used the expression 'public place' in Section 3. Il a motor vehicle is not used in a 'publicaplace'or not kept for use in a 'public place'then the person concerned is not deriving benelit from the public infrastructure; therefore, he should not be burdened with the motor vehicle tax for such period.

47. Coming to Rule 12A, we Iind that there is omission of the expression 'public place'in the said rule. Opening words of the said rule are: 'for the purpose of Section 3 of the A<:t'. Thus, the purpose of Rule l2A is to give effect to Section 3. It is trite law that a rule cannot traverse beyond the scope and ambit of the parent statute. Rule 12A has to be interpreted in such a way so as to be in sync with Section 3. Question is not of the | 2025 SCC Onl-ine SC i851 I I 3 W.P.No.25467 of 201 I SK, J used or kept for use in a ,public place'. When admittedly the motor vehicles of the appellant were conrrned for use within the RINL premises which is a closed area then question of the vehicles being used or kept for being used in a .public place, does not arise. In the ultimate analysis, the core of the controversy lies in interpretation of Section 3. Rule l2A, as already discussed above, has to be read to give effect to the charging section. Therefore, the words appearing in Rule l2A i.e. h motor vehicle shall be deemed to be kept for use,has to be read as ,a motor vehicle deemed to be kept for use in a public place'. / Th. finding of the above said Judgment squarely apply to the instant case. 6' In view of the same, following the Judgment of the Honble supreme court in Tarachand Logistic solutions Limited's case (1 supra) and for the reasons mentioned therein, the writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned Demand Notice dated 16.08.201 1 pertaining to registration of vehicles and the respondents are directed to refund the amounts paid by the petitioner in pursuance of the interim order passed by this court in w.P.M.P.No.31356 of 2ort in w.p.No.2 s46T of 2ott dated l2-o9.2o1 1. There shalr be no order as to costs. F-H [ 4 W.P.No.25467 of 201 I SK, J

7. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed. /TRUE COPY" ASSISTANT S SD'-C. DEEPIKA To, I TheSecretary,TransportDepartment,Hyderabad,stateofTelangana 2. The DePutY TransPort Commissioner, Sangareddy, Medak District' Telangana.

3. One CC to SRI N.NAVEEN KUMAR' Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two ccs to GP FOR TRANSPORT, High court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

5. Two CD CoPies BSR BS HIGH COURT DATED: 20t1112025 ORDER WP.No.25467 of 2011 u t * Ftl T S 14 t* 2l * PATC DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS W