JAMAL MUHAMMED V K Vs. ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers :

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the vehicle purchased by the petitioner much prior to the present financial year is refused to be registered, insisting for payment of one time tax at the revised rate, which was brought into force with effect from 01/04/2012. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no lapse or failure on the part of the petitioner, since the application of the petitioner who wanted to have the number of the vehicle as "KL-11/AM 1600" in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act/Rules, particularly Section 95 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, was not properly dealt with by the concerned respondents and that the question of law came to be finally declared by this Court only as per judgment in W.A.No.1490/2011 and connected cases. It is also stated that the petitioner had already satisfied the tax at the prevailing rate at the time of obtaining temporary registration, which was on 24/03/2012 and as such, the liability of the petitioner ought to have been considered and decided, with reference to the law which prevailed as on the said date and not on the date of passing the order by the concerned authority deciding to grant permanent registration.

(3.) ON going through the verdict as above, this Court finds that the submission made by the learned Government Pleader is fully justified and the issue is answered by this Court against the persons like the petitioner herein. In the said circumstances, this Court finds that nothing further requires to be considered in this writ petition. There is no merit in the writ petition and the same is dismissed accordingly.