S R RANGIAH Vs. RTO BELLARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decision on the question raised in this case turns upon the meaning and scope of Ss. 33(1) (b) and 60 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ("the Act") .

(2.) The facts leading to the petition are these : The petitioner is the owner of a stage carriage bearing registration No.MYU 3485. The vehicle had a temporary permit for the route Davangere to. Sathanur granted by the R.T.A., Chitradurga. On 15-2-1975, the vehicle was found plying at a place called Kenchanakere which was two miles away from Sathanur. The Motor Vehicles Inspector who checked the vehicle, submitted a report to the Regional Transport Officer ("R.T.O."). Bellary stating that the vehicle was used without a permit on a, route beyond Sathanur. Upon that report, the RTO issued a notice to the petitioner under S. 33(1) (b) of the Act calling upon him to show cause why the certificate of registration of the vehicle should not be suspended. The petitioner personally appeared before the R.T.O., and submitted that the villagers of Kenchanakere forcibly took away the vehicle in connection with a local festival and therefore he should be excused. The RTO did not accept that explanation. He made an order under S. 33(1) (b) of the Act suspending the certificate of registration for a period of four months.

(3.) The petitioner appealed, to the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Gulbarga Dn. That appeal was dismissed upholding the order of the R.T.O. The petitioner now challenges the said orders in this petition under Arts 226 and 227 of the Constitution.