Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. he main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned order had been passed by the respondent, without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3. The said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner had not been refuted by the learned counsel for the respondent. 4. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the respondent, dated 26.9.2012, is set aside. However, it is made clear that it would be open to the respondent to pass an appropriate order, based on the Memo of charge issued under Section 86 of the Motor Vehicles Act,1988, on 15.03.2012 and the explanation submitted by the petitioner, dated 14.08.2012, after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. This Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.