Writ Petition No. 6743 of 2025 · The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO. 6743 OF 2025 (T-MVT) BETWEEN: MANJUNATHA S/O HANUMANTHA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, NO.628, MAIN ROAD, HEBBALE, SOMWARPET TALUK, COORG DISTRICT-571 232 (BY SRI B R SUNDARA RAJA GUPTA, ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER Digitally signed by LEELAVATHI S R Location: High Court of Karnataka 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, M.S.BUILDING, DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BANGALORE-560001 2. COMMISSIONER FOR TRANSPORTS TTMC BUILDING, 1ST FLOOR, KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560027 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER BENGALURU EAST, INDIRANAGARA, BENGALURU-560 038
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI HEMA KUMAR. K, AGA) …RESPONDENTS THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 A WRIT OF PROHIBITION RESTRAINING THE RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE SYSTEM OF BLACKLISTING OF VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER BEARING NO.KA-03-/NH 4898 AND ETC.,. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR ORAL ORDER In this petition the petitioner seeks following reliefs: (i) “Issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from enforcing the system of blacklisting of vehicle of the petitioner bearing No.KA-03/NH-4898. (ii) And issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to consider the prayer for transfer of vehicle in question for future transaction in respect of vehicle No.KA-03/NH-4898. (iii) And grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner invited the attention of this Court to the status of the subject vehicle as downloaded from - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 the internet vide Annexure-B in order to contend that the issue in controversy involved in the present petition is directly and squarely covered by the following judgments of this Court: Case number Sl No. 1 W.P.Nos.14740-14745/2019 (MV) 2 W.P.Nos.27738-27741/2019 (MV) 3 W.P.No.13317/2020 (MV) Date of Disposal 22.10.2019 22.10.2019 23.11.2020 4. It is submitted that the present petition may be disposed of in terms of the aforesaid judgments and by reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to submit the representation to the respondents with a direction to consider the same and take appropriate decision and pass appropriate orders within stipulated time, till which the respondents may be directed not to take precipitative/coercive steps against the petitioner. 5. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submits that if the petitioner submits his representation, the same shall be considered by the respondent in accordance with law. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 6. In W.P.No.13317/2020 (Moinuddin’s case) supra, this Court followed the earlier judgments of this Court and held as under: “ORDER Learned HCGP accepts notice for the respondents. In this petition, petitioner has sought for the following reliefs: "i) issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from enforcing the system of blacklisting of vehicle of the petitioner bearing No. KA- 14/A/3684. ii) and grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice and equity." 2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. 3. This Court in identical matter in the case of 'J.V.Shivaganesh and another Vs. State of Karnataka and others' - W.P.Nos.42270-42271/2019 (MV) decided on 11th September 2019 has passed the following order: “.............................................. 3. Undisputedly petitioners have not been heard before passing Annexures-A1 and A2 respectively, by which, their civil rights have been affected. Therefore, Annexures-A1 and A2 are treated as show cause notices to the petitioners. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 4. Petitioners are hereby directed to furnish judicial explanation along with any pronouncements in identical matters, if any. After receipt of the petitioners’ explanation, the concerned Authority is hereby directed to pass a speaking order and communicate decision within a period of six weeks and till then, not to precipitate any action on the petitioners. With the above observations, petitions stand
Decision
disposed of.” 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in the light of the aforesaid decision of this Court passed under identical circumstances, I pass the following: ORDER i) Petition is disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court in the case of 'J.V.Shivaganesh and another Vs. State of Karnataka and others' - W.P.Nos.42270-42271/2019 (MV) dated 11.09.2019. ii) Annexure-A is treated as a Show Cause Notice to the petitioner. iii) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit his reply/explanation to Annexure-A as well as representation to the respondents along with documents, judicial precedents etc. iv) Upon receipt of the aforesaid reply/explanation, representation, documents etc., the respondents are directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 same in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the same and communicate the same to the petitioner. v) It is further directed that till the aforesaid orders to be passed by the respondents are received by the petitioner, respondents shall not take any precipitative steps nor precipitate any action against the petitioner. Subject to the aforesaid directions, petition stands disposed of.” 7. Though several contentions have been urged by both sides in support of their respective claims, having regard to the specific submission made on behalf of the petitioner that they would submit representations along with relevant documents within period of two weeks from today, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the petition, reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to submit the representation to the respondents within a period of two weeks from today. 8. If such representation along with documents is submitted by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today, the concerned respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders/take appropriate decision within a - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:10258 WP No. 6743 of 2025 period of eight weeks from the date of submission of the representation. 9. It is further directed that till consideration of the said representation, respondents shall not take precipitative/ coercive steps against the petitioner. With the aforesaid directions petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE MR