High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of rhe constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more preferabry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, decraring the action of the 3rd rpspondent in not effecting transfer of ownership and effecting re-assignment of Registration numbers in favour of the petitioner in respect of vehicres bearing R.No.A/H 04 Ey 1038 (Eicher van), Vehicre R.No.MH 29 x 4663 ( TATA tvax picup), Vehicre R.No. MH 26 F 9195 (Borero picup), vehicre R.No.rr,4H 14 cp 4184 (TATA Rx picup) purchased by the petitioner in the public auction of the confiscated vehicles conducted by the 4th respondent as arbitrary, illegal, improper, unjust, unconstitutional and violotive of the statutory provisions of Motor Vehicles Act- 1988 and the Rules prescribed there under and viorative of raw raid down by the Hon'ble High court in 2011 (i ) ALD 747 and viorative of principres of naturar justice and consequenfly direct the 3rd respondent to effect transfer of ownership andre.aSSignmentofregiStrationnumbersoftheSaidvehicles,forthwithinfavour of the petitioner l.A. NO: 1 OF 20 'l5(WPMP. NO:5'13 63 0F 2015) PetitionunderSectionl5lCPCprayingthatintheclrcumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the 3rd respondent t(l effect transfer of ownership and reassignment of registration numbers of the vehicles bearing R.No.trulH 04 EY 1038 (Eicher 'r/an); Vehicle R.No.MH29X4663(TATAtV'laxPicup);VehicleRNol\4H26F9'195(Bolero picup) and Vehicle R.No.lt/H 14 cP 4184 (TATA Rx Picup) purchased by the petitioner in the public auction of confiscated vehicles r;onductec by the 4th respondent, forthwith in favour of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt RAJANIKANTH JWALA Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3: GP FOR TRANSPORT Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 & 4: GP FOR FORESTS ' The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTIGE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO.39800 0F 2015 ORDER: Petitioners purchased vehicles bearing R.No.MH-04-EY-1038 (Eicher Van), Vehicle R.No.MH-29-X-4663 (Tata Max Picup), Vehicle R.No.MH-26-F-9195 (Bolero Picup), Vehicle R.No.MH-1 4-CP-4184 (Tata Rx Picup) in a public auction of confiscated vehicles conducted by respondent No.4-Divisional Force Officer Nirmal. lt is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent No'3-RTA is not effecting transfer of ownership of the subiect vehicles in the name of. the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Transport. Perused the record.

3. At the hearing, learned counsel submits that the subject matter is squarely covered by the order, dated 22.03.2011 passed by this Court in W.P.No.33666 of 2O1Q and therefore, the same may be passed in this writ Petition also. 4. ln the said writ petition, this Court referring the case in B' Ramakrishna Reddy Vs. Dy- Transport Commissioner, Kadapal observed as under.- "ln the instant case, the registeing authority has reiected the application of the writ Petitionq right at the threshold without ' 2ol t (t) ALD 747 2 subjecting the vehicle in question to check or insPection for its roadworthiness. l, therefore, dircct the l't respondent to forthwith proceed to check and inspect the vehicle Produced by the writ petitioner bearing Registration Na.T-N.09-AT'8471 and in case ,1 is found to be roadworthy, register the same in the name of the ld respondent in terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 57 of the Rules at the fiIs,t instance and thereafter recotd transfer of ownership in favout of the writ petitioner, in accordance with law' Let this exercise be completed within a maximum Petiod of thirty days from today-" " Learned counsel for the petitioner submi's that the vehicle is absolutely roadworthy and fit tor plying on the roads and hence, the registration coutd not have been refused. He fufther submits that from the date of Purchase of the vehicle by the petitioner, the registration number as well as the chassis have been remained same a-s on the date of auction by the Forcst DePartment- Leamed counsel for the respondents does not disPute the aforementioned I egal position. ln view of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed and the first respondent is directed to register the aforementioned vehicle in the name of the petitioner forthwith, ,Vo costs' "

5. ln terms of the order daled 22.03.201'l and for the reasons alike, this Writ Petition is also allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 6 Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed That Rule Nisi has been m T,,lEifi15=,X9XF:'^J5 ade absolute as above' ECH IEF JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE, on this FRIDAY' ARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE SD/.N. S HARI ASSISTANT REG TRAR //TRUE COPY// To

1. The PrinciPal Secretary' of Telangan;a ' TransPort DePartment SECTION OFFICER Secretariat, H'Yderabad ' State 7 Telangana. Authority, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 2- The Principal Secretary, Forest Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of 3. The Deputy Transport Commissioner and, Secretary, Region Transport -/ 4. The Divisional Forest Officer, Nirmal, Adilabad District. 5. One CC to SRI RAJANIKANTH JWALA, Advocate tOpUCl 6. Two CCs to GP FOR FORESTS, High Court for the State 6f Telangana, at 7. Two CCs to GP FOR TRANSPORT, High Court for the State of Telangana, at 8. Two CD Copies Hyderabad. [OUT] Hyderabad. [OUT] PSK. CJP HT I I z:a r:-r: S ,l'tr t ,fl k e 2iltg zi:i , '/. a.'r.-,. \\-==.ATer't^ HIGH COURT DATED:0310112025 ORDER WP.No.39800 of 2015 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,otdd X^.