PAULOSE MATHAI Vs. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I. Petitioner in this original petition seeks for issuance of a writ of certiorari or appropriate orders to quash Ext. P2 order passed by the registering authority, namely; the respondent herein. He also seeks for issuance of a writ of mandamus or order compelling the respondent to assign new registration mark for the vehicle PY-03/0586 with the seating capacity vide 45 in all and to endorse the transfer of ownership of vehicle in favour of the petitioner.

(2.) I heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondent.

(3.) THIS court issued notice to the respondent and pursuant to that on behalf of the respondent, a statement has been filed, wherein it is stated that the vehicle was produced for inspection before the Assistant Motor vehicles Inspector, Thalassery on 24-8-1995 for the purpose of assignment of fresh registration mark. On a comparative scrutiny of the particulars contained in the registration certificate with the physical features of the vehicle, it is found that the body of the vehicle is reconstructed after its original registration. Under Rule 269 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, the petitioner is bound to provide the maximum number of seats possible in the existing body to the satisfaction -of the registering authority subject to the minimum required under sub rule ( I) of Rule 269 and therefore, Ext. P2 order passed by the respondent is perfectly justifiable. It is also stated that on measuring the seating arrangement, dimension and other relevant particulars, it is found that the particulars entered in the certificate of registration does not tally with its body dimensions and measurements. The measurements shows that the over all length of the vehicle after alteration is 910 cros. , whereas in the registration certificate it is 877cros. The over hand as per inspection certificate is 275 cros. , whereas in the registration certificate it is 260 cros. , and as such it is to be concluded that alteration and reconstruction of the body of the vehicle was made unauthorisedly without the sanction of the registering authority. The fact regarding the alteration of the body of the vehicle is not 'recorded in the registration certificate.