H. G. BALAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the order passed by respondent-1 vide annexure-A suspending the registration certificate of the petitioner in respect of the vehicle No. CNQ 480 by order dated 20-9-1986. ( 2 ) THE facts of the case in brief are as follows :-The petitioner is the owner of vehicle bearing registration No. CNQ 4to which is an omni bus On information received by way of a report from the superintendent of Post Office, Bijapur, the matter was investigated and proceedings were initiated. On the basis of what was detected at the time of interception of the vehicle, a check-report was prepared and it was alleged that one B. Y. Kashe and his family proceeded from sindagi to Kedar for a North-India trip by collecting hire charges However, the case of the petitioner is that the said B Y. Kashe is a personal friend of the petitioner and it was a joint trip of the petitioner and his friend, with the understanding that the diesel charges had to be equally shared by both of them It is further stated that the petitioner was not in Station when the show-cause notice was sent to him and his absence it has been served on his family members. The petitioner was not aware of the show cause notice and in the absence of an explanation, the authority passed the impugned order relying on the check-report prepared by the first respondent. Thereafter, the order of suspension followed for a period of 4 months vide Annexure A. The petitioner being aggrieved by the impugned order, preferred an appeal to the appellate authority rather belatedly. There is no provision for condonation of delay when an appeal is preferred belatedly before the appellate authority. Consequently, the appeal was rejected. Ultimately, the matter found its way to this Court, with a grievance that the maximum punishment awarded by the authority is not valid in law. ( 3 ) THE short point for consideration is, whether in the circumstances, of the case, the maximum punishment by way of suspension of the registration certificate for a period of four months is sustainable in law. ( 4 ) A perusal of the impugned order shows that though there is no procedural irregularity, no specific reasons have been assigned to support the award of maximum punishment. ( 4 ) A perusal of the impugned order shows that though there is no procedural irregularity, no specific reasons have been assigned to support the award of maximum punishment. The discretion does not appear to have been exercised judiciously. Any punishment in a matter of this nature has to be commensurate with the gravity of the offence committed. In awarding punishment, it is essential that the surrounding circumstances, the cause of commission of offence and the nature of offence have to be taken into consideration. Particularly in the circumstances of this case wherein the petitioner himself was a co-passenger and what was collected was only part of diesel charges, it is neither justifiable nor reasonable to conclude that an offence of a grave nature has been committed. However, it may be a technical offence. My attention has been drawn to a decision of this Court in k. Krishna ppa. v. Registering Authority and R. T. O. which is reported in air 1980 Kar. 21. What was considered in the said decision was whether automatically there could be an award or imposition of maximum punishment of 4 months of suspension for similar statutory violation. The offence in question is one resulting from plying a vehicle for hire or reward without a valid permit, attracting the provisions of Section 33 (1) (b) of the motor Vehicles Act, 1939. It was held in the said case that considerations such as the vehicle being rendered useless for a period of 4 months resulting in serious public inconvenience, loss of revenue to the exchequer and the extenuating circumstances should all weigh in the mind of the authority before quantifying the punishment. I am in respectful agreement with the views held by the learned judge in the said decision. ( 5 ) I consider that the punishment meted out to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case is neither just nor fair and therefore, deserves to be reduced. ( 6 ) FOR the reasons stated above, the suspension of the registration certificate in respect of the vehicle in question belonging to the petitioner is reduced from 4 months to 15 days. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. Sri. Ramesh, learned Government pleader was directed to take notice in this case and to enter memo of appearance within two weeks from today. Writ Petition Allowed. --- *** --- .