ORDER :

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the non-refund of life tax amount of Rs. 54,530/- collected from him during the registration of his vehicle bearing No. AP-16-FC-3897 and the subsequent proceedings in Rc. No. 3897/2020, dated 26.2.2020 issued by the Deputy Transport Commissioner, Vijayawada, 3rd respondent herein, rejecting his application for refund.

2. The petitioner has a physical disability of 50% in his left leg due to post-polio residual paralysis from his childhood. He had retired after serving in the Government health sector. After retirement, he had purchased a Maruti Suzuki Celerio ZXI-AGS (O), petrol variant with an automatic gear shift. According to the petitioner, one of the reasons why he had purchased the said vehicle was the attractive concessional GST rate, which was advertised by the Company for customers with physical disability. The petitioner was also medically examined by the Chief Medical Officer of Maruti Suzuki India Limited at New Delhi and was given a certificate dated 31.1.2018 that he has a disability of 50% of left lower limb and that he was certified fit to drive a passenger car fitted with automatic transmission. The vehicle was delivered to the petitioner on 23.7.2018 with a temporary registration being given by the 4th respondent. At the time of the final registration, the petitioner said that due to a technical error in the website of the Road Transport Authority, the petitioner had to pay a life tax of Rs. 54,530/- to the 5th respondent, who in turn paid it to respondents 1 to 4. Thereafter, on the advise of the 5th respondent, the petitioner sought refund of the life tax amount from the 2nd and 3rd respondents. The petitioner was also able to obtain a classification for his car as “invalid carriage” and a new registration certificate to that effect was also issued by the 4th respondent.

3. The petitioner, relying upon G.O.Ms. No. 351, dated 29.8.1978, issued under Section 9(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1963, claimed exemption from payment of life tax and consequential refund of the amount of Rs. 54,530/- which was paid as life tax. The petitioner submitted an application on 24.1.2020 to the 3rd respondent alongwith his physical disability certificate and the certificate issued by the manufacturer of the vehicle to the effect that the vehicle purchased by the petitioner was suitable for his disability. However, the 3rd respondent, by proceedings in Rc. No. 3897/C2/2020, dated 26.2.2020 had rejected the said application for refund. The 3rd respondent took the view that G.O.Ms. No. 351 dated 29.8.1978 granted tax exemption only to those vehicles fitted with such gadgets or contrivances, owned by physically handicapped persons, and hence refund of life tax is not permissible as no gadget or contrivance was fixed in the car of the petitioner.

4. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ petition.

5. Sri. Sasanka Bhuvanagiri, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the stipulation in G.O.Ms. No. 351 dated 29.8.1978 was that a car should be altered to enable the physically handicapped persons to drive the vehicle and the said stipulation should not be understood as a condition precedent for grant of refund.

6. The learned Government pleader for Transport has filed a counter-affidavit on behalf of the respondents. He contends that exemption of tax payable under the Act would be available only to such vehicles, which are fitted with some gadgets or contrivances to make the vehicle capable of driving by physically handicapped persons, who own the vehicle. He further relies upon the TCs Circular Memo No. 14/4928/S/2012, dated 18.10.2012, which reads as follows:

“It is observed that G.O.Ms. No. 351 Tr. R&B (Tr-1) Department, dated 29.8.1978 is a facility given to physically challenged persons to encourage them, which is negated by the fact that first they have to pay life tax and later apply for refund and pur