V.p.o. Manesar, Gurgaon Hr. Owner Of Truck No v. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport

Judgment

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur. Regional Transport Office, Sikar. Regional Transport Officer, Alwar. District Transport Officer, Kotputali District Jaipur. Regional Transport Office, Bharatpur.

5. With ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12950/2025

1. Ajay Kumar S/o Rajender, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Pali 9130, Faridabad, District, Faridabad Hariyana. Owner Of Truck No. Rj.29.gb.3668

2. Praveen S/o Dyaram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o H. No. 126, Block No.1, Vill- Pali Faridabad Hr. Owner Of Truck No. Hr.38.ae.0842

3. Kaviraj S/o Shardha Ram, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Sahapariya Mohalla Near, Pali Bass Road Vill-Pali Faridabad Hr. Owner Of Truck No. Hr.38.ae.0042 [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (2 of 8) [CW-12933/2025]

4. Parveen S/o Dyaram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Word No. 22, Mohalla-Buchahera Badiya, Kuva Ke Pass Kotputli Jaipur Raj. Owner Of Truck No. Rj.32.ge.4200

5. Sunil Kumar S/o Bhim Singh, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Pawta, Near Baarat Ghar, Pawta Pali Faridabad Hr. Owner Of Truck No. Hr.38.ag.0916 ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat,

5. Jaipur. Regional Transport Office, Sikar. Regional Transport Officer, Alwar. District Transport Officer, Kotputali District Jaipur. Regional Transport Office, Bharatpur. ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13029/2025

1. Dasrath S/o Bhairu Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Dalpat Pura Neem Ka Thana Sikar, Rajasthan. Registered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj32Gd3857.

2. M/s Neelkanth Mineral, Registered Address- Ajmeri Neem Ka Thana Sikar, (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Damodar Prasad Sharma S/o Shimbhu Dayal Sharma R/o Ward No 06 Barmouri Mohaalla Sanwal Pura Tanwaran Dist Sikar. (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gc7117.

3. M/s Dhaka Construction Company, Registered Address- Choudhary Krishi Farm Bajor Sikar, (Rajasthan). Through Proprietor Surendra Singh Dhaka S/o Gyana Ram R/o Bajor Sikar, (Rajasthan). Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gd1485.

4. Santra Devi W/o Bhanwar Lal, R/o 170 Choudhary Krishi Farm Nh 52 Bajor Sikar, Rajasthan. Registered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. Rj23Gd9985.

5. M/s Choudhary Construction Company, Registered Address- Choudhary Krishi Farm Bajor Sikar, [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (3 of 8) [CW-12933/2025] (Rajasthan). Through Proprietor Bhanwar Lal S/o Gyana Ram R/o Bajor Sikar, (Rajasthan). Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gd9785. ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary.

2. Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary.

3. Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office Sikar, District Sikar. (Rajasthan).

5. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Kotputali, District Kotputali-Behror. (Rajasthan). ----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13032/2025

1. M/s S.r. Minerals, Registered Address-3/25 Housing Board Devipura Sikar, (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Sanjay Kumar S/o Jai Gopal Aged About 53, R/o 3/25, Housing Board Colony, Devipura Sikar, (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gc5679.

2. M/s Shree Ram Minerals, Registered Address- Plot No E 137, Ind Area Ajeetgarh, Sikar. (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Pramod Kumar Gupta S/o Kalishwar Prasad R/o Plot No 302 Tower 09 Kangoli Green Maharana Pratap Near Vaishali Nagar Jaipur, (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gc5455 And Rj23Gc5678.

3. M/s Aryan Logistic, Registered Address- Chaksu Police Station Ligistic Tonk Road Chaksu Jaipur, (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Aryan Sharma S/o Prahlad Saran Sharma R/o Lalsot Dausa, (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj38Ga0888. [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (4 of 8) [CW-12933/2025]

4. M/s Sidhi Vinayak Minerals, Registered Address- P No 28 New Santosh Sagar Nagar Jaipur Road Sikar, (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Rajesh Kumar S/o Sanvar Mal R/o P No 28 New Santosh Sagar Nagar Jaipur Road Sikar, (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gc7282.

5. M/s Gopinath Minchem Private Ltd, Registered Address- E13 B Riico Ajeetgarh Sikar, (Rajasthan) Through Proprietor Amit Kumar Pansari S/o Girdhari Lal Agarwal R/o Ward No 08 Opposite Bhati Mension Ki Gali Bajaj Road Sikar, (Rajasthan) Owner Of Vehicles Registration No. Rj23Gb0713. ----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary.

2. Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary.

3. Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.

4. Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office Sikar, District Sikar. (Rajasthan).

5. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Kotputali, District Kotputali-Behror. (Rajasthan).

6. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Jagatpura, District Jaipur. (Rajasthan).

7. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Sahapura, District Jaipur. (Rajasthan). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Ms. Jamasi Ms. Shanu Sharma for Mr. Surjeet Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jeetendra Singh Takar for Mr. S.S. Naruka, AAG [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (5 of 8) [CW-12933/2025] HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 28/08/2025

1. As the present bunch of petitions revolve around identical issues of facts and law, and the petitions herein are filed seeking analogous reliefs; and the present petitions are adjudicated by this common judgment which shall be applicable upon all the petitions connected herein on mutatis mutandis basis.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that these petitions are filed under the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India to seek redressal of grievances arising from the arbitrary and unjust actions of the respondents. It is apprised to the Court that the primary issue herein is that the respondents have suspended the Registration Certificates (RCs) of the petitioners' vehicles/trucks, without complying with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and other allied statues. It is further submitted that the said action of the respondents violates not only the procedural requirements of the governing statues, such as issuing notices, providing adequate opportunity for hearing, or ensuring proper service of notices, but also the principles of natural justice. Nevertheless, as a result of the aforementioned, hefty penalties were imposed upon the petitioners for alleged overloading, merely on the basis of third- party evidence, such as reports from the Mining Department, without conducting physical verification.

3. Learned counsel has relied upon the provisions of Sections 53, 113, 114, and 194 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (primarily), [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (6 of 8) [CW-12933/2025] along with the principles of natural justice and the General Clauses Act, 1897 qua mandatory effective service. It is submitted that if notices or orders are not served at the correct and complete addresses, the service is deemed to be defective and incomplete. Additionally, counsel has referred to provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which mandate granting three-four opportunities for hearing, and has submitted that neither of the aforementioned provisions and procedural mandates were adhered by the respondents herein.

4. In this regard and to substantiate the contentions made insofar learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of Co- ordinate Bench of this Court passed on 28.07.2025 in SBCWP No.9721/2025 titled as Kanwar Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors.

5. Per contra, learned counsel Mr. Jeetendra Singh Takar appearing on behalf of learned Additional Advocate General, Mr. S.S. Naruka has submitted that as per the software and information provided by the Mining Department or other relevant departments, details regarding gross weight and related credentials are taken; based on which the issuance of E-Ravanna and requirements are carried out. It is submitted that an assiduous analysis is conducted by the competent authorities, and after adhering with the due procedure within the prescribed upper limit, appropriate proceedings are initiated.

6. It is further submitted that the principles of natural justice are duly complied with in-toto, including the issuance of show cause notices, provisions of a reasonable notice period, and [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (7 of 8) [CW-12933/2025] opportunities for hearing or grant of audience. Regarding service of notices, it is emphasized that the addresses provided in the registration certificate remains valid until amended and communicated to the relevant department. Therefore, the contention regarding defective service of notice is not tenable. Additionally, it is submitted that the petitioners have an efficacious alternative remedy as available under the Motor Vehicles Act, nevertheless in the petitions at hand, disputed questions of fact are involved and the writ Court ought not to entertain and adjudicate the same. Accordingly, it is prayed that these petitions should be dismissed at the threshold, due to the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy and the statutory conditions being complied with.

7. Having heard the contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties, taking note of the material available on record in the lead petition, and the judgments cited at the Bar, this Court without going into the arena of disputed questions of facts and merits of the individual petitions, is of a view that the impugned orders (as assailed in the respective petitions), whereby the Registration Certificates of the vehicles owned/possessed by the petitioners are suspended, needs to be set aside, for the reasons that the said vehicles are the source of bread and butter of the petitioners and their families. Howsoever, the aforementioned revocation shall only be effective subject to a condition that the petitioners along with their counsel concerned shall report to/before the notice issuing authorities, on 11.09.2025, preferably [2025:RJ-JP:34377] (8 of 8) [CW-12933/2025] in-between 11:00 am to 01:00 pm. Thereafter, due reply be filed within a period of 15 days i.e. by 26.09.2025.

8. Audience with respect to the same will be provided by competent authority on 03.10.2025. Adjudication of the same be carried out thereafter within a period of 15 days.

9. It is made clear that during the period of consideration of grievances, the RCs of the vehicles owned/possessed by the petitioners, which are suspended, shall be revoked and the status of the vehicle in furtherance to the consequential proceedings as registered and entered upon the official portal concerned, shall be updated, without further ado.

10. It is made clear that no prejudice will be caused to either side on account of passing of the present order.

11. In the light of the same, the petitions are disposed of with aforementioned directions being granted. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed. DEEPAK/18, 21-23 (SAMEER JAIN),J