N MANI Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER THIRUVANATHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is alleged that on 22-1-1987 the officers of the Motor Vehicle's Department seized the petitioner's vehicle KBT 2792 for the arrears and the same was entrusted with the third respondent, Sub-Inspector for Police, Vattappara Police Station, for safe custody, which is evidenced by Ext. P1, He was in great financial difficulties and therefore could not pay the tax arrears or take steps to get the vehicle released. On 16-12-1991 he moved an application before the first respondent to grant him exemption from payment of tax. But his application was rejected by order dated 17-12-1991, copy of which is Ext. P2. In doing so, the first respondent relied upon the notification, a copy of which is Ext. P3. Aggrieved by Ext. P2, the petitioner submitted a representation, copy of which is Ext. P4, to the Minister for Transport and it has not been disposed of so far. According to the petitioner, Exts. P2 and P3, "in so far as it excludes motor vehicles held in public custody for non-payment of tax from the exemption provisions are unreasonable and unjust and are ultra vires the provisions of the Constitution as well as the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and the Rules framed thereunder". Several grounds have been urged in support of the contention. Petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus to respondents 1, 2 and 4 to grant him exemption from payment of vehicle tax for the period during which it was in Government custody and also for a declaration that respondents 1, 2 and 4 are not empowered to collect any tax from him in respect of his vehicle and for a further order to release the vehicle on a bond pending disposal of the Original Petitioner.

(2.) Heard counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.

(3.) On 22-1-1987 a contract carriage that belongs to the petitioner was seized by the Motor Vehicle's Department for tax arrears and it was entrusted to the third respondent for safe custody the same day. According to him, since he did not and could not ply the vehicle or use it on public roads after it was seized he is not bound either legally or morally to pay vehicle tax during the period it was in official custody. The submission is rested on Section 5 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, (hereinafter called the Act) which reads :