A.K.GANGULY, J.

1. This writ petition has been moved for quashing an order issued under memo No. 15775 dated 22-9-1993 by the Joint Transport Commissioner, Bihar (respondent No, 2).

2. The contention of the writ petitioner is that he purchased .the vehicle in question being No. BHK-5107 on 4/06/1993 and on that very date he took- possession of the vehicle. It has been further stated .in the petition that the additional tax of the bus in question was paid up to 31/12/1992 by the previous owner And the tart token to that effect was issued by respondent No. 3.

3. The petitioner thereafter deposited the tax for the said bus for the period 1-6-1993 to 31-8-1993 and filed an affidavit before respondent No. 3 praying for issuance of tax token for the current period and also for exemption of road tax/ additional tax for the period 1-1-1993 to 31-5-1993 as the petitioner did not ply the said bus as "public service vehicle" for the aforesaid period.

4. According to the petitioner the said bus was registered in the name of the petitioner on 30-7-1993 by respondent No. 3 and the provisional tax token was issued for the period 1-6-1993 to 31-8-1993. The exemption application filed by the petitioner was forwarded by respondent No. 3 to the State Transport Commissioner (Taxing Officer) under Sec. 9A(1) of the Bihar and Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1930 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) by letter No: 520 dated 19/07/1993 recommending for exemption of payment of tax for the period 1-1-1993 to 31-5-1993.

5. Respondent No. 2 held that the petitioner is liable to pay tax for the said period i.e. 1-1-1993 to 31-5-1993 and passed an order directing realisation of the tax for the said period of 1-1-1993 to 31-5-1993 along with penalty by his order dated 9-9-1993. The said order is the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

6. The said order has been challenged, mainly, on the ground that as the petitioner was not the owner or in possession of the vehicle in question between 1-1-1993 and 31-5-1993, he is not liable to pay tax for the said period. In support of his contention, the petitioner relied upon the provisions of Sec. 6 of the said Act, which is set out below:-

"6. Imposition of tax - (1) As from the first day of January, 1931, and after that date there shall be paid on every motor vehicle a tax at the rate specified in the Second Schedule to this Act.(2) The tax shall be paid annually by the person who keeps a motor vehcile for use Provided that the tax may be paid -

(i) for one or more quarterly periods, on payment for each such quarterly period of one-quarter of the annual rate of the tax, (ii), for any period less than a quarterly period expiring on the last date of any quarterly period, on payment of one -twelfth of the annual rate of the tax for every month or part" of a month included in such period, (iii) for one month, commencing from the date of registration at the rate of one-twelfth of the annual rate of the tax where the motor vehicle is temporarily registered under Sec. 25 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (IV of 1939). (3) The taxing officer shall grant to every person who pays the tax or additional tax in respect of any motor vehicle - (a) a receipt in which shall be specified the particulars of the tax paid and such other particulars as may be prescribed; and (b) a tax token in the prescribed form.

7. The aforesaid Sec. 6 of the Act describes that the tax is imposed on the vehicle in question and the tax has to be obviously paid by the registered owner of the vehicle or by the person who is having possession or control over the vehicle in question. From the scheme of the Act, it is clear that the vehicle in respect of which tax has not been paid remains first charge as would appear from Sec. 11A of the said Act which is set out below:-

"11A. Any tax imposed under this Act shall be recoverable as arrear of the tax revenue and shall be a first charge on the motor vehicle in respect of which such