JUDGMENT

A. K. Patnaik, J. —

Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) NO. 11653 OF 2010:

Leave granted.

2. This is an appeal by special leave against the order dated 23.03.2010 of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in A.S.T. No. 83 of 2010 (for short ‘the impugned order).

3. The facts very briefly are that on 02.09.2009 the State Transport Authority, Bihar, issued a temporary permit in favour of the respondent for plying a Stage Carriage Vehicle for the route Motihari in Bihar to Siliguri in West Bengal, for a period of four months with effect from 01.09.2009. On 07.09.2009, the respondent submitted an application to the Secretary, State Transport Authority, West Bengal, for counter-signature on the temporary permit. On 08.09.2009, the respondent also deposited a sum of Rs. 9,180/- towards tax and additional tax in respect of his vehicles for plying within the State of West Bengal. On 08.10.2009 vehicle no. BR-31P 5105 of the respondent was intercepted by the Enforcement Branch of the Motor Vehicle Department at Siliguri and the driver of the vehicle was asked to produce the papers including permit and proof of payment of tax relating to the vehicle. Since the permit produced by the driver of the vehicle was not counter-signed by the State Transport Authority, West Bengal, the vehicle was seized by the officials of the Motor Vehicle Department and a notice was issued to the respondent under Section 16(4)(a) & (b) of the West Bengal Motor Vehicles Tax Act, 1970 (for short ‘the Motor Vehicles Tax Act’) to produce the papers and documents showing payment of tax and additional tax due for the vehicle and other necessary documents relating to the vehicle failing which the vehicle will be sold.

4. Aggrieved, the respondent filed Writ Petition No. 17755 (W) of 2009 before the Calcutta High Court challenging the seizure of his vehicle and praying for release of the vehicle alongwith the seized documents. The appellants herein filed a reply in the said Writ Petition contending inter alia that the temporary Stage Carriage permit granted by the State Transport Authority, Bihar, in favour of the respondent for the route Motihari in Bihar to Siliguri in West Bengal had not been counter-signed by the State Transport Authority, West Bengal, as provided in Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Motor Vehicles Act’) and hence the vehicle of the respondent was plying without a valid permit and had to be seized under Section 207 of the said Act. In the reply, the appellants also contended that in the facts of the case the duration of plying has to be reckoned as 17 weeks retrospective from the date of interception of the vehicle and the respondent is liable to pay a tax at the rate applicable for a period of 17 weeks together with a fine of equal amount and therefore the total of tax and penalty payable by the respondent works out to Rs.1,13,460/- as per the assessment memo dated 15.10.2009 of the Taxing Officer, Siliguri.

5. The learned Single Judge, who heard the Writ Petition, held in his order dated 04.03.2010 that while sub-section (1) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that counter-signature is absolutely necessary for a permanent permit, it will be clear from sub-section (7) of Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act that for a temporary permit no such counter-signature is necessary. The learned Single Judge also held that the entire tax had been paid by the respondent relying on a notification dated 13.04.2007 of the State Government. Accordingly, the learned Single Judge allowed the Writ Petition and directed the appellants to forthwith release the vehicle of the respondent and awarded a cost of Rs.10,000/- in favour of the respondent against the appellants. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the appellants filed an appeal before the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court and by the impugned order, the Division Bench of the High Court sustained the findings of the learned Single