ORDER : 1. Respondent No. 3 has retained the driving licence of the petitioner w.e.f. June 2019. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents for releasing his driving licence. 2. Following facts come out from the pleadings of the parties: (i) Petitioner was holder of driving licence bearing No. HP-25-20160000019. The driving licence was issued on 12.05.2016 and was valid upto 08.12.2019. (ii) Petitioner was challaned on 10.03.2017 by the police for drunken driving. His licence was suspended by respondent No. 3-Registering and Licensing Authority, Kalpa at Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur, H.P. on 12.04.2017 for a period of three months, that is, w.e.f. 10.03.2017 to 09.06.2017. The petitioner was challaned second time by the police on 19.06.2017 for the same offence of drunken driving. Respondent No. 3, on 24.06.2017, suspended petitioner’s licence for a period of three months w.e.f. 19.06.2017 to 18.09.2017. The petitioner was challaned once again for the same offence by the police and his licence was suspended the third time on 10.04.2019 by respondent No. 3 for a period of three months w.e.f. 1.03.2019 to 31.05.2019. (iii) The respondent No. 3 retained the driving licence of the petitioner w.e.f. 01.06.2019. It is still lying with the respondents. The driving licence was valid up to 08.12.2019. The petitioner could not take any steps for its renewal as it was lying with the respondents. In the backdrop of the above factual submissions, petitioner has prayed for a direction for the respondents to release his driving licence. 3. The respondent No. 3 in its reply has admitted that the petitioner was challaned three times by the police for drunken driving and for suspending his licence for a period of three months in three different spells [(a) 10.03.2017 to 09.06.2017; (b) 19.06.2017 to 18.09.2017; and (c) 01.03.2019 to 31.05.2019]. The respondent has defended retaining petitioner’s driving licence on the ground that he was challaned by the police for the same offence thrice within a period of two years. It has further been submitted that on 10.04.2019, a letter was written by respondent No. 3 to the Director Transport, Government of Himachal Pradesh, seeking clarification in the matter. The clarification was still awaited. For want of clarification the order in accordance with law has not been passed. 4. Legal provisions: Learned counsel for the parties, apart from stating the factual position, have also assisted on the legal provisions applicable. The clarification was still awaited. For want of clarification the order in accordance with law has not been passed. 4. Legal provisions: Learned counsel for the parties, apart from stating the factual position, have also assisted on the legal provisions applicable. In view of the nature of controversy, it will be appropriate to first take note of the applicable legal provisions. (i) Section 206 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short MV Act) gives the powers to the police officer to impound the documents, sub-section (4) thereof provides for seizing the driving licence of the driver of a motor vehicle as under: 206. Power of police officer to impound document: “(1) Any police officer or other person authorised in this behalf by the State Government may, if he has reason to believe that any identification mark carried on a motor vehicle or any licence, permit, certificate of registration, certificate of insurance or other document produced to him by the driver or person in charge of a motor vehicle is a false document within the meaning of section 464 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) seize the mark or document and call upon the driver or owner of the vehicle to account for his possession of or the presence in the vehicle of such mark or document. (2) Any police officer or other person authorised in this behalf by the State Government may, if he has reason to believe that the driver of a motor vehicle who is charged with any offence under this Act may abscond or otherwise avoid the service of a summons, seize any licence held by such driver and forward it into the Court taking cognizance of the offence and the said Court shall on the first appearance of such driver before it, return the licence to him in exchange for the temporary acknowledgment given under sub-section (3). (3) A police officer or other person seizing a licence under sub-section (2) shall give to the person surrendering the licence a temporary acknowledgment therefor and such acknowledgment shall authorise the holder to drive until the licence has been returned to him or until such date as may be specified by the police officer or other person in the acknowledgment whichever is earlier: Provided that if any Magistrate, police officer or other person authorised by the State Government in this behalf is, on an application made to him, satisfied that the licence cannot be, or has not been, returned to the holder thereof before the date specified in the acknowledgment for any reason for which the holder is not responsible, the Magistrate, police officer or other person, as the case may be, may extend the period of authorization to drive to such date as may be specified in the acknowledgment. (4) A police officer or other person authorized in this behalf by the State Government shall, if he has reason to believe that the driver of a motor vehicle has committed an offence under any of Sections 183, 184, 185, 189, 190, 194C, 194 D, or 194E seize the driving licence held by such driver and forwarded it to the licensing authority for disqualification or revocation proceedings under Section 19. Provided that the person seizing the licence shall give to the person surrendering the licence a temporary acknowledgement therefore, but such acknowledgement shall not authorize the holder to driver until the licence has been returned to him.” Section 206 (4) of MV Act authorizes the competent officer to seize the driving licence of the driver of the motor vehicle, who had committed any of the offences under Sections 183, 184, 185, 189, 190, 194C, 194 D or 194E of the Act. The seized driving licence is to be forwarded to the licensing authority for disqualification or revocation proceedings under Section 19 of MV Act. (ii) Section 19 of the MV Act pertains to the powers of the licensing authority to disqualify from holding the driving licence or revoking such licence. Such power is to be exercised by the licensing authority after granting an opportunity of hearing to the holder of the driving licence. (ii) Section 19 of the MV Act pertains to the powers of the licensing authority to disqualify from holding the driving licence or revoking such licence. Such power is to be exercised by the licensing authority after granting an opportunity of hearing to the holder of the driving licence. The licensing authority can either discharge the holder of driving licence or for the reasons to be recorded in writing, may make an order disqualifying the concerned person for a specific period from holding or obtaining any driving licence to drive any class or description of the vehicles specified in the licence. The licensing authority can also make an order for revoking the driving licence. The period for disqualification from holding or obtaining licence has also been specified under sub-section 19(1A) of the Act which is three months for the first offence and for the second or subsequent offence with revocation of the driving licence of the person concerned. Section 19 of the MV Act is extracted hereinafter: “19. The period for disqualification from holding or obtaining licence has also been specified under sub-section 19(1A) of the Act which is three months for the first offence and for the second or subsequent offence with revocation of the driving licence of the person concerned. Section 19 of the MV Act is extracted hereinafter: “19. Power of licensing authority to disqualify from holding a driving licence or revoke such licence: (1) If a licensing authority is satisfied, after giving the holder of a driving licence an opportunity of being heard, that he: (a) is a habitual criminal or a habitual drunkard; (b) is a habitual addict to any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance within the meaning of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985); (c) is using or has used a motor vehicle in the commission of a cognizable offence; (d) has by his previous conduct as driver of a motor vehicle shown that his driving is likely to be attended with danger to the public; (e) has obtained any driving licence or a licence to drive a particular class or description of motor vehicle by fraud or misrepresentation; (f) has committed any such act which is likely to cause nuisance or danger to the public, as may be prescribed by the Central Government, having regard to the objects of this Act; (g) has failed to submit to, or has not passed, the tests referred to in the proviso to sub-section (3) of section 22; (h) being a person under the age of eighteen years who has been granted a learner's licence or a driving licence with the consent in writing of the person having the care of the holder of the licence and has ceased to be in such care, it may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, make an order: (i) disqualifying that person for a specified period for holding or obtaining any driving licence to drive all or any classes or descriptions of vehicles specified in the licence; (ii) revoke any such licence. (1A) Where a licence has been forwarded to the licensing authority under sub-section (4) of section 206, the licensing authority, if satisfied after giving the holder of the driving licence an opportunity of being heard, may either discharge the holder of a driving licence or, it may for detailed reasons recorded in writing, make an order disqualifying such person from holding or obtaining any licence to drive all or any class or description of vehicles specified in the licence: (a) for a first offence, for a period of three months; (b) for a second or subsequent offence, with revocation of the driving licence of such person: Provided that where a driving licence is revoked under this section, the name of the holder of such driving licence may be placed in the public domain in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (2) Where an order under sub-section (1) or sub-section (1A) is made, the holder of a driving licence shall forthwith surrender his driving licence to the licensing authority making the order, if the driving licence has not already been surrendered, and the licensing authority shall: (a) if the driving licence is a driving licence issued under this Act, keep it until the disqualification has expired or has been removed; (b) if it is not a driving licence issued under this Act, endorse the disqualification upon it and send it to the licensing authority by which it was issued; (c) in the case of revocation of any licence, endorse the revocation upon it and if it is not the authority which issued the same, intimate the fact of revocation to the authority which issued that licence: Provided that the driving licence shall be returned to the holder at the end of the period of disqualification only if he successfully completes the driverrefresher training course. (2A) The licence holder whose licence has been suspended shall undergo the driver refresher training course from a school or establishment licenced and regulated under section 12 or such other agency, as may be notified by the Central Government. (2B) The nature, syllabus and duration of the driver refresher training course shall be such as may Le prescribed by the Central Government. (2B) The nature, syllabus and duration of the driver refresher training course shall be such as may Le prescribed by the Central Government. (3) Any person aggrieved by an order made by a licensing authority under sub-section (1) for sub-section (1A) may, within thirty days of the receipt of the order, appeal to the prescribed authority, and such appellate authority shall give notice to the licensing authority and hear either party if so required by that party and may pass such order as it thinks fit and an order passed by any such appellate authority shall be final.” 5. Observations: (i) In the instant case, petitioner was admittedly challaned thrice by the police for drunken driving i.e. for the offence under Section 185 of MV Act. The police exercising powers under Sections 206(4) of the Act, seized petitioner’s driving licence. Criminal action was not initiated but the seized driving licnece was forwarded to respondent No. 3 i.e. Registering and Licensing Authority, Kalpa at Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur, H.P. (ii) The driving licence was suspended by respondent No. 3-Registering and Licensing Authority Kalpa at Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur, H.P. thrice for three different spells, each for the period of three months. Thereafter, the driving licnece was retained by respondent No. 3. Admittedly, action in accordance with Section 19 of the MV Act was not taken by the respondent No. 3. No opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner as is envisaged under Section 19(1) of the MV Act. No order was passed by respondent No. 3 for disqualifying the petitioner from holding or obtaining any driving licence or for revoking such licence. Had any order been passed by respondent No. 3 under Section 19(1) or 19(1)(A) of the MV Act, the same would have been appealable in terms of Section 19(3) of the Act. (iii) Respondent No. 3 has retained the driving licence of the petitioner without passing any order under Section 19 of the MV Act. The petitioner’s licence is lying with respondent No. 3 ever since 01.06.2019 without there being any order of retention, disqualification for holding the driving licnece or regarding revocation of the licnece. Obviously, in absence of any order, the period of disqualification/retention etc. of the driving licence also cannot be gathered from the record. The petitioner’s licence is lying with respondent No. 3 ever since 01.06.2019 without there being any order of retention, disqualification for holding the driving licnece or regarding revocation of the licnece. Obviously, in absence of any order, the period of disqualification/retention etc. of the driving licence also cannot be gathered from the record. Section 19(2) provides for returning the driving licence to the holder at the end of period of disqualification, removal of disqualification in case of successful completion of Driver Refresher Training Course of the holder of the driving licence. (iv) From the record, it appears that respondent No. 3 has ignored all the provisions of the MV Act. Instead of taking action in accordance with law, respondent No. 3 chose to solicit some clarification from the Director Transport H.P. on 10.04.20219. In its reply filed to the writ petition, respondent No. 3 has pleaded that the aforesaid clarification was as to whether the driving licence of the petitioner should be cancelled or not. It is not understandable as to why should respondent No. 3 seek clarification from the Director Transport with respect to the action required to be taken by it. Respondent No. 3 was the Registering and Licensing Authority Kalpa at Reckong Peo, Distract Kinnaur, H.P. It was for respondent No. 3 to act in accordance with law and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the MV Act. Had respondent No. 3 taken action in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Act in respect of the driving licence of the petitioner, the present situation would not have arisen. It cannot be ignored that this writ petition was instituted on 25.10.2020, whereas, driving licence was retained by the respondent without passing any order whatsoever w.e.f. 01.06.2019. The validity period of the driving licence expired on 08.12.2019. The committee constituted by Hon’ble Supreme Court on road safety has also emphasized for suspending the driving licence for a period not less than three months under Section 19 of the MV Act read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The validity period of the driving licence expired on 08.12.2019. The committee constituted by Hon’ble Supreme Court on road safety has also emphasized for suspending the driving licence for a period not less than three months under Section 19 of the MV Act read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. It will be appropriate to extract hereinafter the directions issued on 17.11.2015 by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on Road Safety Laws to the States/UTs for implementation: “Subject: Directions to the States/UTs to implement road safety laws: Sir/Madam, The Supreme Court Committee on Road Safety, vide its letter of even number dated 18th August, 2015 had inter-alia, issued the following direction to all States/UTs and their concerned Departments for taking action by them: Suspension of the Driving License for a period of not less than 3 months under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 for: (i) Driving at a speed exceeding the specified limit which in the Committee’s view would also include red light jumping: (ii) Carrying overload in goods carriages and carrying persons in goods carriages. (iii) Driving vehicles under the influence of drink and drugs. (iv) Using mobile phone while driving a vehicle. 2. During discussions, the Committee had with the Central Ministries and Delhi Traffic Police on 6th November, 2015. It was brought to the notice of the Committee that the Traffic Police has been implementing the directions issued by the Committee on 18th August, 2015 vigorously and is forwarding the cases to the Transport Deptt. For suspension of Driving Licenses in case of above traffic violations. However, any action taken by the Transport Deptt. could not be effective as the Driving License would remain with the violator who can use it with impunity and also evade the process of law. 3. This has been considered by the Committee in detail. The Committee directs that in case of above traffic violations, the Traffic Police should take possession of the Driving License of the violator and forward it to the Transport Deptt. of the concerned State/UT, who would suspend the License for a period of not less than 3 months under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The Transport Deptt. of the concerned State/UT, who would suspend the License for a period of not less than 3 months under Section 19 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Rule 21 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. The Transport Deptt. would return the Driving License to the violator after expiry of said period. 4. All States/UTs are requested to comply with the above directions of the Committee strictly.” 6. The submissions made by learned Additional Advocate General to permit respondent No. 3 to pass an order now under Section 19 of the MV Act regarding petitioner’s licence, cannot be accepted at this stage. No doubt, the petitioner was challaned thrice for drunken driving and his licence was suspended each time for three months within a period of two years, but the fact remains that respondent No. 3 took no steps for disqualifying the petitioner from holding the driving licence or for revoking his driving licence. In case of disqualification, period was also required to be mentioned in the order that was to be passed in accordance with law. Respondents had retained the driving licence of the petitioner unauthorizedly after 01.06.2019 and in the interregnum, petitioner’s driving licence expired on 08.12.2019. 7. In view of the above discussions, this writ petition is allowed. Respondent No. 3 is directed to forthwith return petitioner’s driving licence to him. Taking into consideration the manner in which respondent No. 3 has dealt with the matter; in retaining the driving licence of the petitioner without passing any order and; also taking note of the fact where respondent No. 3-Registering and Licensing Authority has shown complete ignorance of the provisions of the MV Act regarding its powers and duties under Section 19 of the MV Act, there shall be a direction to respondents No. 1 and 2 to apprise all Registering and Licensing Authorities in the State about their duties and powers as envisaged under Sections 206 and 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 within a period of four weeks from today. A copy of this judgment be also forwarded by respondents No. 1 and 2 to all the Registering and Licensing Authorities in the State. 8. The present writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any. 9. For compliance, list on 12.07.2022.