ORDER : 1. The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records relating to an order issued on 17.04.2024 by the fifth respondent / the Regional Transport Officer, Regional Transport Office (West), Salem and to quash the same. 2. The petitioner seeks a direction against the respondents to register the new car of the petitioner, HARRIER XZA + O and to grant exemption from payment of tax. 3. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the petitioner stated that she is a physically challenged person suffering from locomotor disability with 60% of disability since her right hand is disabled. She was also issued with a disability certificate by the Government of India on 14.4.2020. She stated that travelling by autos and taxis was extremely inconvenient and therefore she had purchased a new car HARRIER XZA + O. She had further stated that the Commission for Persons with Disability (Divyangjan), New Delhi had recommended that the Department of Heavy Industries, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises and the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Union of India should make amendments in their Rules to give concession with reference to GST, Road Tax, Toll Tax etc., to vehicles purchased by persons with disabilities. 4. It had also been stated that a Writ Petition had also filed in W.P.(MD).No. 20511 of 2021 in this regard. 5. The petitioner claims that since she is a person with disability, the vehicle must be exempted from Motor Vehicle Tax as well as GST and other benefits must be granted to the petitioner. The petitioner had given a representation on 12.04.2024. It was rejected on 17.04.2024 stating that the vehicle was neither specially designed nor an adapted vehicle. Questioning that rejection, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 6. A counter affidavit had been filed on behalf of the fifth respondent, Regional Transport Officer, Regional Transport Office/West, Salem, wherein it had been stated that since the petitioner is suffering from 60% disability in her right hand, she must depend on someone for driving a vehicle. It had been further stated that if the vehicle is not designed for a disabled person and if the petitioner is in a need of a driver then the concession extended on the basis of existing Rules to persons with disability is defeated. It had been further stated that if the vehicle is not designed for a disabled person and if the petitioner is in a need of a driver then the concession extended on the basis of existing Rules to persons with disability is defeated. It had been further stated that if the vehicle is sold to a third party, then grant of tax exemption to the vehicle when it is owned by differently abled person would be meaningless and the Government would be put to loss. It had been stated that the representation of the petitioner had been rejected since the vehicle was neither a specially designed nor an adapted vehicle. It had been contended that exemption can be granted only when the vehicles are specially designed or adapted for the use of the physically handicapped person. It had been thus stated that the Writ Petition should be dismissed. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a Circular issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways dated 03.02.2023 wherein guidelines and notifications had been issued to provide equal opportunity for persons with disabilities. Among other guidelines, it had been stated that in the registration certificate, it should be mentioned that the ownership type is Divyangjan. It had also been pointed out the vehicle type, whether adapted or otherwise should not be the criteria. It was therefore argued that directions must be issued to the Registering Authorities for implementation of the notification. But however, as on date, the State Motor Vehicles Taxation Act or the Rules have not been amended. 8. The learned Additional Advocate General who appeared on behalf of the respondents placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No. 3352, Home (TR.I) Department, dated 29.12.1976 wherein payment of tax for specially designed or adapted vehicles had been exempted on and from 01.01.1977. Further in G.O.(2D).No. 162, Home (Transport-1) Department, dated 28.04.2011, approval had been granted to carry out retrofitment in motor vehicles at two workshops, one in Chennai and the other in Coimbatore for the usage of differently abled persons. The learned Additional Advocate General pointed out that motor vehicles which are specially designed or adapted for the use of a physically handicapped person would be exempted from Motor Vehicle Tax. 9. The learned Additional Advocate General pointed out that motor vehicles which are specially designed or adapted for the use of a physically handicapped person would be exempted from Motor Vehicle Tax. 9. In the instant case, the learned Additional Advocate General pointed out that the vehicle purchased by the writ petitoner is a high end model and if the vehicle is again sold to a person, who is not physically disabled then the Government would be put to loss if exemption of tax is granted. The learned Additional Advocate General therefore pointed out that there is every possibility of the vehicle being misused by a third party stranger and by persons, who are not physically disabled. He therefore stated that the Writ Petition must be dismissed. 10. I have carefully considered the arguments advanced and perused the materials available on records. 11. The Writ Petitioner suffers from locomotor disability with 60% of disability since her right hand is disabled. This fact is not denied or disputed by the respondents. She cannot drive a motor vehicle by herself. She requires a driver to drive her motor vehicle. Being a person with physical disability, she also finds it difficult to commute in authorickshaws and taxis. She had therefore taken a decision to purchase a motor vehicle. She then sought exemption of GST and Motor Vehicle Tax and other such leveies and taxes. She had given a representation in this regard on 12.04.2024. This was rejected by the respondents by the impugned order dated 17.04.2024. In the impugned order, the respondents have contended that the vehicle had not been either specially designed or been adapted for the use by a physically challenged person. But even if the vehicle is to be so designed, the petitioner cannot drive the same since her right hand suffers from disability. 12. The learned Additional Advocate General had pointed out that the Government of Tamil Nadu had issued G.O.Ms.No. 3352 – Home (TR.I) Department, dated 29.12.1976 providing that motor vehicles which are specially designed or adapted for physically handicapped persons are exempted from tax. Thereafter, a further Government Order had been issued in G.O.(2D) No. 162 by Home (TR.I) Department identifying two workshops, one in Chennai and the other in Coimbatore to carry out retrofitment work in motor cars. Thereafter, a further Government Order had been issued in G.O.(2D) No. 162 by Home (TR.I) Department identifying two workshops, one in Chennai and the other in Coimbatore to carry out retrofitment work in motor cars. It is thus contended by the learned Additional Advocate General that the vehicle purchased by the petitioner would be eligible for an exemption from tax only if the vehicle is specially designed or adapted for the use of the petitioner. 13. However, a Circular had been issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MVL Section) on 03.02.2023 with specific object to grant equal opportunities to Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan). Guidelines and Notifications had been issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. The guidelines were as follows:- “3. Though there is no express restriction imposed by G.S.R.661 (E) dated 22.10.2020 for recording ownership type “Divyangjan”, whether the vehicle is adapted or normal, new or old yet some registering authorities are insisting upon new and adapted vehicle for recording ownership type “Divyangjan”. Under the following circumstances, a person with disability (PWD) may desire for recording ownership type “Divyangjan” in the registration certificate: a. Divyangjan may not like/not able to drive himself and may hire a driver to drive his vehicle who is in possession of an effective driving license. b. Divyangjan may not be able to afford a new vehicle and prefers to bue in-use vehicle whose ownership type is individual in the registration certificate. c. Divyangjan may buy in-use vehicle auctioned by Government, whose ownership type is Government in the registration certificate. d. There may be instances where a person, who already owns a motor vehicle and at later stage became disabled, may like to change ownership type from individual to Divyangjan.” [Emphasis Supplied] 14. It is thus seen that the Government is aware of a circumstance wherein a person with disability may not be able to drive the vehicle but would be able to hire a driver. It is thus seen that the claim of the respondent that exemption could be granted only when the vehicle is specially designed or adapted is a narrow minded view. There must be a provision for a person with disability, who cannot drive but who engages a driver to purchase a vehicle and seek exemption from payment of tax. 15. It must also be mentioned in the Registration Certificate that the ownership type is Divyangjan. There must be a provision for a person with disability, who cannot drive but who engages a driver to purchase a vehicle and seek exemption from payment of tax. 15. It must also be mentioned in the Registration Certificate that the ownership type is Divyangjan. 16. I hold that the responsibility is on the respondents to regulate the usage of the vehicle and if it is found that it is put to unauthorised use then necessary steps in accordance with law can be initiated but the respondent cannot deny exemption of tax though the owner is physically disabled only because the vehicle had not been specially designed or adapted. This interpretation by the respondent would go against the concept of providing equal opportunity for their growth and development to persons with disabilities. 17. A learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (MD) No. 20511 of 2021 [ K. Paranthaman Vs. Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Department of Heavy Industry and others ] by an order dated 22.12.2021 had observed that the recommendations of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Joint Secretary, DEPWD with respect to extending benefits of GST concession to Divyangjan for purchase of motor vehicle must be considered. The learned Single Judge in his order had observed as follows:- “5. Today, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that instructions have since been obtained. Learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India (Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disability) had constituted a committee under the Chairmanship of Joint Secretary, DEPwD with members drawn from Department of Revenue, Ministry of Heavy Industries and Ministry of Road Transport and Highways for exploring the possibility of extending the benefits of GST concession to all 21 categories of Divyangjan (PwD) for purchase of motor vehicles. This Court is informed that this Committee has since submitted its report. Recommendations of the Committee are captured in paragraph 9 of the report and the same read as follows: ' 9. Recommendations of the Committee: i) The Committee recommends that GST concession certificate for purchase of motor vehicle as available presently for persons with orthopaedic disability and their kith and kin should be extended to all categories of persons with benchmark disabilities mentioned in RPwD Act, 2016 and their kith and kin. Recommendations of the Committee: i) The Committee recommends that GST concession certificate for purchase of motor vehicle as available presently for persons with orthopaedic disability and their kith and kin should be extended to all categories of persons with benchmark disabilities mentioned in RPwD Act, 2016 and their kith and kin. ii) Presently, Ministry of Heavy Industries's portal is already linked for Aadhaar authentication. DEPwD can provide access to the UDID portal to Ministry of Heavy Industries, for verification of certificate of disability. However, till the time all the manual certificates of disability are fully digitized, physical certificate of disability should continue to be considered by Ministry of Heavy Industries. iii) Granting GST concession on the basis of medical certificate in addition to certificate of disability should be discontinued.' 6. Learned Assistant Solicitor General of India submits that the above recommendations would be accepted and given effect to. This by itself gives a quietus to the captioned writ petition. ” 18. When a considered stand had been taken that persons with disabilities who own vehicles should not be denied concession only because they have to engage a driver, it is only appropriate that the respondents also apply their mind with respect to the vehicle purchased by the writ petitioner. 19. In view of this observation, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the fifth respondent for fresh consideration of the entire issue on the basis of the Circular issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, MVL Section dated 03.02.2023 and on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee constituted by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India (Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disability). The fifth respondent is directed to re- examine the entire issue and pass a fresh order. If required, opportunity of personal hearing may be granted to the petitioner. The entire exercise must be completed within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 20. The Writ Petition stands allowed with the above direction. No order as to costs.