R RAMASAMY Vs. SECRETARY MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the petitioner in person, Mr. D. Gandhi Raj, Government Advocate, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr. D. Sivaraman for Respondent No.4.

(2.) THE petitioner, a physically handicapped person, is unable to use his both legs. He has purchased a scooter under the brand name "Honda Activa", which has been registered as TN58 M 2760. Subsequently, through a private mechanic, the petitioner has added two supporting wheels only for the purpose of maintaining the balance. Similarly, the petitioner has purchased a Ford car registered as TN59AB 8894 which has been converted into hand operation mode through a private mechanic. THE petitioner sought for information from the Regional Transport Office regarding the procedure to obtain license to enable the petitioner to drive the vehicles. THE RTO replied that alteration in the vehicles should be approved by the Automotive Research Association of India, Pune. THE petitioner then contacted the Automotive Research Association of India seeking approval of the specially designed vehicles for the disabled persons and the Automotive Research Association informed that such approval can be given to the company manufactured vehicles and not for the vehicles modified by private individuals.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for Respondents 1 to 3 has raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition should not be entertained, as the petitioner has got alternative remedy of filing appeal before the Transport Commissioner. This objection cannot be countenanced inasmuch as the letter dated 21.1.2008 written by the RTO clearly indicates that such reply was given after obtaining the clarification from the Transport Commissioner. As a matter of fact, the RTO has also extracted the clarification issued by the Transport Commissioner. It is therefore obvious that even if the petitioner would file any appeal before the Transport Commissioner, it would be an exercise in futility inasmuch as the Transport Commissioner has already given an opinion in one-way or the other. Therefore, this preliminary objection is not accepted.