JOSE CHERIAN Vs. ADDITIONAL REGISTERING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue raised in these writ petitions is with regard to applicability of bus body designs AIS:052 (Revision 1) 2008 prescribed in terms of Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 to vehicles purchased before 01.10.2014. W.P.(C) .No.1015/2017 is treated as the lead case and the parties and documents are referred to in the judgment as arrayed therein, unless otherwise specified.

(2.) The petitioner in W.P.(C) .No.1015/2017 contends that he had purchased a heavy passenger vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-01/AT 2753 from a registered owner. The vehicle is a 2008 model registered on 1.7.2008 as a Heavy Passenger Motor Vehicle-Educational Institution Bus. The petitioner, after purchase of the vehicle, submitted applications for transfer of ownership and also for altering the class of vehicle to stage carriage. Ext.P5 order was issued by the registering authority granting permission for alteration. The petitioner contends that he had made alterations in conformity with Chapter VII of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 and in particular Part III thereof and had produced the vehicle for inspection. However, by Exhibit P7 order dated 4.1.2018 the Additional Registering Authority held that the bus body code under Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules having come into force on 1.10.2017, new models of buses with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver should be in accordance with AIS 052 (Revision 1) 2008, as amended. It is stated that the alterations made to the petitioner's vehicle do not comply with requirements of the bus body code and the authority rejected the application for alteration as stage carriage, since the vehicle did not comply with 125C of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the issue of conformity with the bus body code had been considered in detail by this Court in judgment dated 22.2017 in W.P.(C) . No.854 of 2017. After considering the provisions of law and arguments advanced in detail, this Court had held that the word 'model' used in Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules applies only to new types of vehicles manufactured after 1.10.2014, after obtaining prototype approval under Rule 126. It was, therefore, held that provisions to Rule 125C of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules applies only to new models of vehicles introduced by manufacturers after obtaining prototype approval after 1.10.2014. It is, therefore, contended that if the models of vehicles of the petitioners are those in existence as on 1.10.2014, the vehicles would be liable to be registered. In the instant case, it is contended the chassis of the motor vehicle being one purchased in 2008, there is absolutely no doubt that the vehicle in question is a model which was in existence as on 1.10.2014 and therefore the alteration cannot be declined.