MARK MOTORS Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The captioned writ petitions are all materially connected in respect of cancellation of trade certificates issued to the petitioners under Rule 35 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 [for short, the Rules, 1989], apparently invoking the power conferred on the Regional Transport Officer (RTO) under Rule 44 of Rules, 1989. Therefore, I heard the writ petitions together and propose to deliver a common judgment.

(2.) The question raised in these writ petitions is that, there is no power vested with the Regional Transport Officer to cancel a trade certificate, otherwise than as provided under Rules 39 to 43 of Rules, 1989. The order passed by the RTO is an appealable order under Rule 45 of Rules, 1989. Some of the writ petitioners have preferred appeals before the appellate authority. I propose to decide the question raised by the petitioners and then relegate the parties to the appellate authority, since various factual circumstances are involved in the subject issue. At the same time, I find that the RTO has passed the impugned orders after providing sufficient opportunity and hearing the respective parties. Facts discernible from W.P.(C) No.14168 of 2017 are recited for the purpose of disposal of the writ petitions.

(3.) Petitioner herein is an authorized dealer for 'HONDA' motorcycles and scooters, operating within the jurisdiction of the RTO, Thiruvananthapuram. On 25.03.2017, petitioner was served with a show cause notice by the 1st respondent requiring to show cause why action shall not be taken against him for selling vehicles with incorrect entries regarding the month/year of manufacture, evident from Ext.P1. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 did not specify the source of power invoked nor the nature of the action proposed. On the other hand, it merely referred to a complaint received from one Shibukumar and a letter of the 2nd respondent issued in that regard.