RAJENDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ application the petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 14-8-99 issued by the respondent No. 2, the Divisional Commissioner, South Chhotanagpur Division, Ranchi by which a direction has been issued to the authority concerned to ask the vehicle owners to deposit Rupees 5,000/- as a cost before issuing a fresh permit or for renewal of permit. The said order has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the writ application.

(2.) The petitioners are the vehicle owners and transporters in the district of Jamshedpur. It is stated that they always deposited all the taxes, challans and other requisites through one Gopal Bose (Agent) and the petitioners used to give money to said Gopal Bose to deposit the challans in lieu of pay-in-slip for the issuance and/or renewal of permit with regard to their vehicles. It was detected that some bungling have been done by said Gopal Bose in depositing the challans. Not only with regard to vehicles of the petitioners but it was found that about 125 pay-in-slips were fake and fabricated. Accordingly an enquiry was conducted and FIR and complaint have been lodged by several transporters against said Gopal Bose. However, when the petitioner approached the respondent-authority for renewal of permit then they came to know that their permits cannot be renewed without payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/-. The contention of the petitioners is that they have deposited all the required amount according to the rule but in spite of that permits have not been issued by the respondents.

(3.) A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents in which it is stated, inter alia, that when the respondents detected that several vehicle owners were plying their vehicles on fake and forge road permit, an enquiry was made by the Regional Transport Authority and it was found that such type of permit had been taken by several transport vehicle owners. Accordingly the show cause notices were issued to such vehicle owners to submit their explanation as to why necessary legal step should not be taken against them for committing forgery and they were also directed to deposit the amount involved in the fake pay-in-slip. A further decision was also taken that permit may not be issued to such vehicle owners unless they deposit the required fee afresh by fresh pay-in-slip in lieu of fake and forge pay-in-slip deposited by them earlier. It is further stated that the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Ranchi had taken the steps to stop the mala fide intention of the transport owners, who succeeded to get the permit on depositing fake and forge pay-in-slip and the Manager, State Bank of India was directed to follow the guidelines regarding acceptance of pay-in-slip and to send the statements of deposits. The Chairman then requested the Secretary-cum-State Transport Commissioner, Bihar, Patna to interfere into the whole matter by a Committee headed by Sr. Officers of the Transport Department and also to audit the working of Regional Transport offices by the audit party of Finance Department. It is further stated in the counter-affidavit that the petitioners themselves have accepted the fact that the requisite fees for the issuance of permit for the vehicle of the petitioners were deposited by the agent and that is why the petitioners agreed in writing to pay cost/fine of Rs. 5,000/- in terms of the impugned order passed by the respondent-authority.