G.ROHINI
E. Dastagiri – Appellant
Versus
Regional Transport Officer – Respondent
G. Rohini, J.
1. The petitioner herein claims to be the registered owner of an Ambulance (Regn. No. AP-04-U-2474) with a seating capacity of five in all. He got it changed as Omni Bus with a seating capacity of 30 in all by removing the Ambulance equipment inside the vehicle and fixing the seats 30 in all. Thereafter the petitioner made an application on 1.2.2010 bringing the alteration to the notice of the 1st respondent - Regional Transport Officer, Proddatur - and requesting to get the vehicle inspected by the Motor Vehicle Inspector so as to enable him to ply it as Omni Bus. The said application was rejected by the 1st respondent by proceedings dated 8.2.2010 and aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed contending that as per Section 52(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the 1st respondent is bound to make the necessary entries in the Registration Certificate by collecting the prescribed fee.
2. The Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that as the petitioner, along with his application dated 1.2.2010 had paid the necessary fee as well as the tax for 30 seats and the same was accepted, it is not open to the 1st respondent to reject the pet
A. Chandra Sekhar Reddy v. Union of India AIR 2002 AP 148
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.