CHARLES DOMINIC Vs. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner purchased a commercial vehicle having an open body. He sought for approval of conversion of the vehicle to one with a closed body. According to the petitioner, the alteration undertaken by him is permissible under Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act. However, in spite of the above, approval has been declined by the authorities as per Exts.P2 and P4 proceedings.

(2.) ACCORDING to the counsel for the petitioner, an alteration of the vehicle without changing the type of the vehicle from the vehicle that took the prototype test is permissible under the Act and Rules. Since the petitioner has not sought to change the nature of the use for which the vehicle is intended, it is contended that the alteration effected is within the scope of the provisions of law applicable. Exts.P2 and P4 orders do not specifically refer or deal with the nature of the alteration undertaken by the petitioner. The orders do not disclose how Section 52 has been violated by the alteration undertaken by the petitioner. Therefore, it is contended that Exts.P2 and P4 are liable to be set aside.

(3.) THIS writ petition is accordingly disposed of as follows:-