Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3789 (MAD)

Mani v. Regional Transport Officer

2014-10-13

T.S.SIVAGNANAM

body2014
Judgment By consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. Heard Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Dig Vijay Pandian, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking to quash the 1st respondent's show cause in memorandum No.42549/E1/14 dated 01.07.2014 with direction to the 1st respondent to return his driving license in DL No.TN47 19970001818. 4. The petitioner is a driver by profession. He has been issued with a driving licence by the 1st respondent as per the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. He is working as a Driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Karur) Limited. On 06.07.2014, the bus, which was driven by the petitioner, met with an accident. In respect of the same, a case in Crime No.116 of 2014 for the offences under Sections 279 and 304(A) of IPC has been registered by the 2nd respondent. The Police seized his driving licence. Thereafter, when the vehicle was produced for inspection on 08.07.2014 before the Motor Vehicle Inspector, the police handed over the licence to the 1st respondent. According to the petitioner, though he made several requests, the 1st respondent did not return the licence. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 6. The issue involved in this writ petition is covered by the decision of this Court in a similar writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.16806 of 2013 dated 22.10.2013, wherein this Court has held as follows: “17. In view of the said conclusion, I hold that the action of the respondent in retaining the licence is illegal. At the same time, since, in the present case, lincence was seized by the police, it is for the licensing authority to return the licence to the police investigating the criminal case forthwith. On getting the driving licence of the petitioner, the investigation officer shall issue acknowledgement, as provided in sub-section 3 of Section 206 of the Motor Vehicles Act and then produce the licence before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The jurisdictional Magistrate shall thereafter return the licence to the petitioner, as provided in Section 206(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. On getting the driving licence of the petitioner, the investigation officer shall issue acknowledgement, as provided in sub-section 3 of Section 206 of the Motor Vehicles Act and then produce the licence before the jurisdictional Magistrate. The jurisdictional Magistrate shall thereafter return the licence to the petitioner, as provided in Section 206(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. On such return of the licence to the petitioner, the petitioner shall execute a bond to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Magistrate undertaking to produce the licence, as and when required by the Court.” 7. Therefore, this Writ Petition is also allowed. The 1strespondent is directed to return the driving licence to the Investigation Officer / 2ndrespondent in Crime No.116 of 2014 on the file of the 2ndrespondent, who shall, in turn issue an acknowledgement to the petitioner and then produce the same before the jurisdictional Magistrate and the learned Magistrate, in turn, shall exercise his power under Section 206(1) of the MV Act and return the licence to the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.