AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Justice K. Surendra Mohan
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition aggrieved by Ext.P6 order by which the respondent has refused to register the petitioner''s transport vehicle on the ground that the dimensions of the vehicle are not in conformity with Rule 93 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The petitioner disputes the recital in Ext.P6 regarding the dimensions of the vehicle. It is also contended that the vehicle had been registered in the State of Haryana initially and thereafter transferred to the State of Tamil Nadu. In both the States, no objections were raised regarding the dimensions of the vehicle. It is contended that had the petitioner been heard before passing Ext.P6, the petitioner would have been able to convince the respondent that the dimensions of the vehicle do not offend the stipulations in Rule 93 referred to above. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also.
There is nothing in Ext.P6 to indicate that the petitioner was heard before the same was issued. Therefore, Ext.P6 is set aside. This Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application dated 27.03.2012 submitted by the petitioner for assignment of new registration to his vehicle presently bearing Registration No.HGV TN-33-AH- 2306 afresh, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner.