The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.16968 of 2024 Hemant Kumar Nayak ..... Petitioner Mr. Tusar Kumar Mishra, Advocate Union of India & Ors. -versus- ..... Opposite Parties Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel for Transport Department Mr. P. K. Parhi, DSGI CORAM: THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 14.07.2025 02. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.5/ Transport Commissioner, State Transport Authority, Odisha, Cuttack files affidavit in Court today, which is taken on record. 3. The Petitioner, by filing this Writ Petition, has sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Party Nos.1 to 4 to carry out necessary correction in the Vahan Software in respect of vehicle KA-17B-2258 and provide access to the petitioner on Vahan Services for payment of tax and grant of fitness and permit. He further seeks a direction from this Court to the Opposite Page 1 of 7. Party Nos. 3 to 4 to permit him to operate his vehicle by accepting the M.V. Tax and grant permit and fitness in respect of his vehicle on manual mode. 4.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-17B-2258 (Transit Mixture) which was purchased from one Rajiv Mohan Nayak Son of Narendranath Nayak in July, 2017. After purchase of the said vehicle, the Regional Transport Officer, Rourkela- Opposite Party No.3 being the Registering Authority had effected the transfer of ownership of the vehicle in favour of the Petitioner. The vehicle has valid Fitness Certificate issued by the Opposite Party No.3. On the basis of the application made by the petitioner, the Opposite Party No.3 has granted Fitness Certificate and permanent permit in respect of his vehicle which is valid from 21.7.2017 to 20.7.2022. He further submits that the Petitioner has paid tax in respect of his vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-17B-2258 in Parivahan site and availed all the motor vehicle services through online on Vahan portal. 5. He further submits that while the Petitioner availing the said service since 2017, from 01.04.2021, the online Vahan-IV Software of Opposite Party No.l did not Page 2 of 7. accept any tax and the petitioner is unable to access the online service. When the Fitness Certificate of the vehicle was going to expire on 18.12.2020, the petitioner had made an application through online for grant of Fitness in respect of the vehicle. However, he found that the vehicle in question shown in two Regional Transport Officers i.e. (1) Regional Transport Officer, Rourkela and (2) Regional Transport Officer, Karwar, Karnatak. Since the vehicle shows in two places, the application submitted by the petitioner for Fitness Certificate as well as for payment of tax has not been accepted. The petitioner had highlighted the above difficulties faced by him before the Regional Transport Officer, Rourkela who effected the transfer of ownership of the vehicle in the name of the petitioner and accepted the tax and issued the permit and fitness. The Regional Transport Officer after verifying the Vahan portal has intimated that since the vehicle of the petitioner shows in two different places i.e. Regional Transport Officer, Rourkela as well as the Regional Transport officer, Karwar, Karnatak. The Vahan-IV has not recognized the vehicle and therefore it is difficult to carry out the vehicle related services through online in Vahan-IV. The petitioner has requested the Regional Transport officer to resolve the issue unless his vehicle will be stranded idle due to non-renewal of Fitness Page 3 of 7. Certificate and non-payment of tax. The Regional Transport Officer, Rourkela assured the petitioner that he will regularize the matter so that the petitioner can avail the online service in Vahan-IV portal. He further submits that the vehicle KA-17B-2258 was originally registered before the Regional Transport Officer, Karwar, Kamatak. The registered owner of the said vehicle had brought the vehicle to Odisha without complying the procedure prescribed under the M.V. Act and operating the said vehicle within the premises of Rourkela Steel Plant without permit and fitness and without payment of M.V. Tax. The said vehicle was checked and reported by the Enforcement team of RTO, Rourkela on many occasions. Ultimately, the said vehicle was seized by the RTO, Rourkela and the owner has been intimated to make payment of M.V. Tax in respect of the vehicle. 6. As the M.V. Tax is outstanding against the vehicle and in spite of issuance of repeated demand notices to the owner of the vehicle, the owner did not turn up to pay the same, the RTO, Rourkela being the Recovery Officer of M.V. Tax initiated recovery proceeding for realization of M.V. Tax and penalty. Ultimately, in the recovery proceeding, the vehicle was put to public auction and one Rajiv Mohan Nayak being the highest bidder purchased Page 4 of 7. the vehicle. The RTO had conducted the auction and sold the vehicle to the said Rajiv Mohan Nayak from whom the present petitioner had purchased the vehicle. Accordingly, the ownership of the said vehicle has been effected in the name of the present petitioner by the Opposite Party No.3. The petitioner has highlighted his grievance before the Opposite Party No.3 and 5. However, the said Authority has not taken any decision to carry out necessary correction in respect of the vehicle bearing Registration No. KA-17B-2258. The petitioner has submitted his representations dated 27.11.2020, 20.3.2023 and 29.5.2023 before the RTO, Rourkela as well as the Transport Commissioner, Odisha to resolve the aforesaid issue so as to enable him to operate his vehicle. But, no action has been taken till date. The petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of vehicle bearing No.KA-17B-2258 from the auction purchaser Rajiv Mohan Nayak. After transfer of ownership of the vehicle, he has availed the permit as well as fitness from the RTO, Rourkela. The petitioner is unable to pay the road tax and avail the vehicle related services since 01.04.2021 such as permit and fitness in respect of the vehicle in Vahan data base since the Engine number and Chassis number of the vehicle is shown RTO, Karwar, Karnatak. The petitioner has highlighted the said difficulties faced by him before Page 5 of 7. the RTO, Rourkela as well as the Transport Commissioner, Odisha on many occasion. Despite all the aforesaid, no action has been taken. As a result, the petitioner is unable to operate his vehicle. 7. It is further submitted that the action of the opposite parties is quite unfair and illegal as they have the legal obligation to provide online service to the petitioner in Vahan portal. In the absence of these facilities provided to the petitioner, he is bound to suffer as no application for permit, payment of tax and grant of fitness in respect of vehicle is carried on. In the aforesaid factual backdrop, the petitioner prays for allowing his prayer. 5. Considering the difficulties faced by the Petitioner, since two vehicles with the same Registration number are plying on the road which has on objection been pointed out by the learned counsel for the Transport Department, this Court had ordered for a detail instruction regarding the said issue. The inspection team constituted pursuant to the direction of this Court vide order dated 29.04.2025 has opined that the vehicle bearing Registration No.KA- 17B-2258 plying in Odisha, Rourkela is said to be a genuine one and the vehicle plying in Karnataka having the same number is a fake one. Page 6 of 7. 6. In view of the above fact, this Court directs the Transport Department to carry out necessary correction in Vahan Software in respect of the vehicle bearing No.KA-17B-2258 and provide access to the petitioner on Vahan Services for payment of tax and grant fitness and permit. This Court further directs the Opposite Party Nos.3 and 4 to permit the Petitioner to operate his vehicle by accepting the M.V.Tax, and grant permit and fitness in respect of his vehicle on manual mode. 7.
Decision
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Gitanjali (Dr. S. K. Panigrahi) Judge Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 16-Jul-2025 17:12:26 Page 7 of 7.