JUDGMENT : 1. These writ petitions are filed by stage carriage operators, who purchased drive-away passenger chassis, which were brought before the concerned Registering Authority for registration after fabrication of bus body. Since common issue is raised in these writ petitions, the writ petitions are heard together and being disposed of by this common judgment, by treating W.P.(C)No.35850 of 2018 as the leading case. 2.1 W.P.(C) No.35850 of 2018:-The petitioner in this writ petition purchased a drive-away passenger chassis (Medium Passenger Motor Vehicle -Stage Carriage) manufactured by Ashok Leyland Ltd., on 12.09.2018. The said vehicle was issued with Ext.P3 temporary certificate of registration by the Additional Registering Authority, Palakkad. Thereafter, the vehicle was entrusted to M/s.Alfa Coach Builders, Karur in Tamil Nadu for fabrication of bus body in compliance with the provisions of the Code and Practice of Bus Body Design and Approval AIS: 052. According to the petitioner, the said body builder is having accreditation certificate, which is renewed by Ext.P4 renewal certificate dated 27.01.2016. The fabrication of the bus body was completed on 17.10.2018 and the fully built up vehicle was delivered to the petitioner together with Ext.P5 initial self certificate of compliance in Form 22B, as provided under Rule 47(1)(g) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for brevity 'the CMV Rules'). Thereafter, the vehicle was produced before the 1st respondent Joint Regional Transport Officer and an application for registration in Form No.20, was submitted along with the documents referred to in Rule 47, including Ext.P5 initial self certificate of compliance. However, on 25.10.2018, the petitioner was issued with a communication by the 1st respondent stating the following reasons; “As per ref.(2) cited intimated the applicant to produce From 22 A Part II prescribed format. The newly produced Form 22 A Part II in letter head of Alfa coach builders, Karur, also is not in the prescribed format as per GSR 287(E) dtd 22/04/2014. For further inspection of the vehicle for registration this format is necessary. It is quite clear that Alfa coach builders, Karur do not possess an approval certificate of Bus Body Design, which is not in accordance with rule 125(C) of CMVR, which shall be in accordance with AIS:052 Code of Practice For Bus Body Design and Approval (as amended time to time) for Ashok Leyland LS1309.4D4R Bus Chassis # 4900 mm WB bearing chassis no.MB1PAECD7JEAB5176. Since the applicant failed to produce Form 22A Part II prescribed format. Hence the above application for registration is rejected.” 2.2 Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P8 order dated 25.10.2018 of the 1st respondent; and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to consider the application for registration, which stands rejected by Ext.P8 order, in the light of Ext.P5 initial self certificate of compliance issued by the accredited body builder in Form 22B of the CMV Rules, as amended by Ext.P2 notification. The document marked as Ext.P7 is stated to be a declaration in Part-II of Form 22A issued by the body builder, which the petitioner produced before the 1st respondent, pursuant to Ext.P6 communication dated 23.10.2018. 2.3. On 02.11.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. 2.4. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner has produced a clarification dated 08.11.2018 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, wherein it has been clarified that, in case the bus body builder submits self certification in From 22B, as per GSR368(E) dated 13.04.2018, there is no requirement for submission of Form 22A. Thereafter, the petitioner has moved I.A.No.2 of 2018, seeking an order to accept Ext.P11 communication dated 26.05.2018 issued by the 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner, wherein all the Registering Authorities in the State are directed to register the vehicles with self certification in Form No.22B by the accredited body builder, complying the requirements of AIS:052 till further orders. The document marked as Ext.P12 is the judgment of this Court dated 23.10.2018 in W.P.(C)No.32040 of 2018. 3.1 W.P.(C)No.32088 of 2018:-The petitioner purchased an Ashok Leyland BSIV passenger chassis from M/s.T.V.Sundaram Iyyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd. covered by Ext.P1 sale certificate. After obtaining temporary registration, the vehicle was entrusted to M/s. Namo Narayana Labour Bus Body Works, Palakkad for fabrication of bus body. After fabrication of bus body in accordance with the specification, the petitioner produced the vehicle before the respondents for registration, on 08.11.2017, by submitting Ext.P2 application in Form No.20. Along with the said application, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22 issued by the manufacturer. The respondents insisted for certificate of accreditation of the body builder. Ext.P4 accreditation certificate of the body builder was produced. Along with the said application, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22 issued by the manufacturer. The respondents insisted for certificate of accreditation of the body builder. Ext.P4 accreditation certificate of the body builder was produced. The petitioner has also produced Ext.P5, which is stated to be the initial self certification by the body builder in Form No.22B. Though, the vehicle was inspected, the registration was not granted. In such circumstances, relying on Ext.P6 communication dated 26.05.2018 issued by the 1st respondent Transport Commissioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to direct respondents 2 and 3 to comply with Ext.P6 circular at the time of consideration of the petitioner's application for registration. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to consider Ext.P2 application for registration, after inspecting the vehicle, in the light of the certification issued by the accredited body builder; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to register the vehicle of the petitioner covered by Exts.P1 and P2, as stage carriage, under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity, 'the MV Act') by taking into consideration Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6. 3.2 A statement has been filed on behalf of the 4th respondent producing therewith copies of the notifications dated 03.10.2012, 22.04.2014 and 13.04.2018 issued by the Central Ministry as Ext.R4(a) to R4(c). The petitioner has also filed I.A. No.2 of 2018, seeking an order to accept Ext.P8 initial self certificate of compliance issued by the body builder in Form 22B, as additional document. 4.1 W.P.(C)No.30413 of 2018:-The petitioner purchased an Ashok Leyland BS-IV passenger chassis covered by Ext.P1 sale certificate dated 26.10.2017. After obtaining temporary registration, the vehicle was entrusted to M/s.Mercury Traders Bus Body Builders, Karur in Tamil Nadu for fabrication of bus body. Thereafter, the petitioner produced the vehicle before the respondents for registration as a stage carriage, under the provisions of the MV Act on 13.07.2018, by submitting Ext.P2 application in Form No.20. Along with the application, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22 issued by the manufacturer dated 25.10.2017. However, the respondents insisted for certificate of accreditation of the body builder. The same was obtained, as evident from Ext.P4 dated 03.03.2016. Along with the application, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22 issued by the manufacturer dated 25.10.2017. However, the respondents insisted for certificate of accreditation of the body builder. The same was obtained, as evident from Ext.P4 dated 03.03.2016. Ext.P5 initial self certificate of compliance in Form No.22B has also been obtained from the body builder. The 2nd respondent, though inspected the vehicle, has not granted registration. Therefore, relying on Ext.P6 circular dated 26.05.2018, the petitioner is before this Court, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to register his vehicle covered by Exts.P1 and P2, as stage carriage, under the provisions of the MV Act, by taking into consideration Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6. 4.2 A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 1st respondent, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. 5.1 W.P.(C)No.32044 of 2018:-The petitioner purchased an Ashok Leyland BSIV passenger chassis from M/s.T.V.Sundaram Iyyengar & Sons Pvt. Ltd. covered by Ext.P1 sale certificate dated 31.10.2017. After obtaining temporary registration, the vehicle was entrusted to M/s. Namo Narayana Labour Bus Body Works, Palakkad for fabrication of bus body. After fabrication of bus body in accordance with the specification, the petitioner produced the vehicle before the respondents for registration, on 08.11.2017, by submitting Ext.P2 application in Form No.20. Along with the said application, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22 issued by the manufacturer. The respondents insisted for certificate of accreditation of the body builder. Ext.P4 accreditation certificate of the body builder was produced. The petitioner has also produced Ext.P5, which is stated to be the initial self certification by the body builder, in Form No.22B. Though, the vehicle was inspected, the registration was not granted. In such circumstances, relying on Ext.P6 communication dated 26.05.2018 issued by the 1st respondent Transport Commissioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to direct respondents 2 and 3 to comply with Ext.P6 circular at the time of consideration of the petitioner's application for registration. In such circumstances, relying on Ext.P6 communication dated 26.05.2018 issued by the 1st respondent Transport Commissioner, the petitioner has filed this writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent to direct respondents 2 and 3 to comply with Ext.P6 circular at the time of consideration of the petitioner's application for registration. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 2 and 3 to consider Ext.P2 application for registration, after inspecting the vehicle, in the light of the certification issued by the accredited body builder; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to register the petitioner's vehicle covered by Exts.P1 and P2 as a stage carriage, under the provisions of the MV Act, by taking into consideration Exts.P3, P4, P5 and P6. 5.2. A statement has been filed on behalf of the 4th respondent producing therewith copies of the notifications dated 03.10.2012, 22.04.2014 and 13.04.2018 issued by the Central Ministry as Ext.R4(a) to R4(c). The 2nd respondent has filed a statement, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The petitioner has also filed I.A. No.2 of 2018, seeking an order to accept Ext.P7 initial self certification in Form No.22B submitted by the body builder, as additional document. 6. The issue that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to the documents, which are essential for consideration of an application for registration made under Rule 47 of the CMV Rules, which deals with registration of vehicle. 7. 6. The issue that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is as to the documents, which are essential for consideration of an application for registration made under Rule 47 of the CMV Rules, which deals with registration of vehicle. 7. As per sub-rule (1) of Rule 47 of the CMV Rules, an application for registration of a motor vehicle shall be made in Form No.20 with the Registering Authority within a period of seven days from the date of taking delivery of such vehicle, excluding the period of journey and shall be accompanied by sale certificate in Form 21, valid certificate of insurance, copy of the proceedings of the State Transport Authority or Transport Commissioner or such other authorities as may be prescribed by the State Government for the purpose of approval of the design in the case of a trailer or a semitrailer; original sale certificate from the concerned authorities in Form 21 in the case of ex-army vehicles; proof of address by way of any one of the documents referred to in Rule 4; temporary registration, if any; Road worthiness certificate in Form No.22 from the manufacturer, Form No.22A from the body builders and, in the case of self certification of the body built on a drive-away chassis by a bus body structure fabricator, certificate of compliance in Form 22B. 8. Relying on Ext.P10 clarification dated 08.11.2018 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in view of the amended provisions, an application for registration of a bus with seating capacity of 13 or more passengers excluding driver, which is covered by Rule 125C of the CMV Rules has to accompany initial certificate of compliance and road worthiness in Form No.22, Part-I of initial certificate of compliance in Form No.22A and the initial self certificate of compliance by the accredited body builder in Form No.22B. If the application is in order, the Registering Authority has to conduct inspection of the vehicle, in terms of the provisions under Section 44 of the MV Act read with Rule 96 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 (for brevity 'the KMV Rules'). Therefore, if the application made by the petitioners is in the prescribed form, which is supported by the enclosures as per the mandatory requirement of the said provision, the respondent has to proceed further with the application. 9. Therefore, if the application made by the petitioners is in the prescribed form, which is supported by the enclosures as per the mandatory requirement of the said provision, the respondent has to proceed further with the application. 9. In the case of the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.35850 of 2018, by Ext.P6, the applications stands rejected since he failed to produce Form No.22A Part-II in the prescribed format. A perusal of Ext.P7 would show that the initial self certification issued by the accredited body builder, stated to have been submitted in Form No.22A, is not in the prescribed format. When the provisions under the CMV Rules and also the form prescribed therein mandate that, the certification issued by the manufacturer/accredited body builder should be in the prescribed form, the document marked as Ext.P7 cannot be treated as a certificate in terms of Form 22A Part-II. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that Form 22B obtained from the accredited body builder has already been produced along with the application made by the petitioner and as such, the Registering Authority has to reconsider the application made by the petitioner. 10. The learned Special Government Pleader would submit that, an application for registration has to accompany the mandatory documents like Form No.20, Form No.22A Part-I by the manufacturer and either Form No.22A Part-II or Form No.22B by the accredited body builder. If the documents produced along with the application are not in the prescribed format and it does not contain the accreditation details of the body builder and other necessary particulars, the Registering Authority cannot process the application. The learned Special Government Pleader would also point out that, as per sub-rule (5) inserted to Rule 47 of the CMV Rules, by the Central Motor Vehicles (5th Amendment) Rules, 2018, on and from the commencement of the said sub-rule, every bus body builder shall upload the bus body details against the relevant drive-away chassis on the portal http://www.vahan.nic.in.makermodel. Therefore, after the introduction of the bus body code and also the relevant amendments to the CMV Rules, once an application for registration is received, the Registering Authority has to consider the same with reference to the details of the bus/bus body uploaded by the manufacturer/accredited body builder, with reference to the certificate/self certification in Form No.22, No.22A/Form No.22B, as the case may be. The learned Special Government Pleader would also submit that the applications made by the petitioners in these writ petitions can be considered by the concerned Registering Authorities, taking note of the relevant statutory provisions and also the self certificate/declaration, etc. produced along with the respective applications. 11. In such circumstances, the 1st respondent Registering Authority in W.P.(C)No.35850 of 2018 shall reconsider the application for registration made by the petitioner, based on the documents produced along with that application in Form 20, Form 22A Part I and Form 22B, after inspecting the vehicle with reference to the bus body details against the relevant drive-away chassis uploaded by the accredited body builder in the web portal, as per the mandate of sub-rule (5) of Rule 47 of the CMV Rules. The 1st respondent shall also ensure that necessary details are furnished in the initial self certification by the accredited body builder in Form 22B and that the signature of the authorised representative of the body builder and also the seal are affixed on each and every page of that certificate, at appropriate place, and that the name of the authorised representative is also mentioned in the last page of that certificate. Similar exercise has to be undertaken by the concerned Registering Authorities in the connected writ petitions. 12. In case, the application made by the petitioners in the respective writ petitions are not in order or do not contain the requisite documents, as referred to hereinbefore, the Registering Authorities shall given an opportunity to the respective petitioners for curing the defects. 13. The process in this regard in respect of the petitioners in the respective writ petitions shall be undertaken and completed within three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, by the respective Registering Authorities, taking note of the relevant statutory provisions and also the observations contained hereinbefore. These writ petitions are disposed of as above.