Back
2017 Supreme(Del) 4892
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
Sandeep Sindhwani - Appellant
Versus
Govt. of Nct. of Delhi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 3791 of 2017
Decided On : 08-05-2017
For the Petitioners:Dhruv Mehta Senior Advocate with Parmod Kumar Sharma and Prashant Bajaj, Advocates
For the Respondents:Anuj Aggarwal and Ms Deboshree Mukherjee, Advocates, Rahul Sharma and C.K. Bhatt, Advocates.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Transport Department to lay down stipulations and conditions for verifying the completion of sale transactions, and the requirement for compliance with the conditions proposed by the Transport Department and the Supreme Court for registration of BS-III compliant vehicles.
Headnote:
BS-III Compliant Vehicles - Registration Issue - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, particularly focusing on the directions of the Supreme Court regarding the sale and registration of BS-III compliant vehicles. The court emphasized the conditions for verifying the completion of sale transactions and the requirements for registration, as stipulated by the Supreme Court and the Transport Department.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought quashing of Minutes of Meeting and communication issued by the Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority regarding the registration of BS-III compliant two-wheeler vehicles. The petitioners, non-registered for online registration, had completed the sale transactions prior to the specified date and submitted the requisite details for registration, but the authorities were refusing to register the vehicles.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the writ petitions, directing the Registering Authority to permit registration of vehicles sold on or before the specified date, and outlined the conditions and verification process for registration, in line with the directions of the Supreme Court and the Transport Department.
Issues: The issues revolved around the refusal of the authorities to register BS-III compliant vehicles sold prior to the specified date, and the conditions and verification process for registration imposed by the Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority and the Transport Department.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Transport Department had the power to lay down stipulations and conditions for verifying the completion of sale transactions, and since the petitioners claimed compliance with the proposed conditions, the issue of the authority of the Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority to lay down additional conditions was not required to be addressed.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were allowed, and the court directed the Registering Authority to permit registration of vehicles sold on or before the specified date, outlining the conditions and verification process for registration.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.
W.P.(C) 3791/2017 & CM No.16680/2017(stay) W.P.(C) 3719/2017 &CM No.16362/2017(stay)
The petitioners, by the present petitions, seek quashing of Minutes of Meeting dated 31.03.2017 and communication dated 03.04.2017 issued by respondent No.3, i.e. Environment Pollution (Prevention & Control) Authority (hereinafter referred to as ‘EPCA').
2. The petitioners are dealers in two wheeler vehicles. The petitioners contend to be dealers, who are not registered for carrying on online registration facility of two-wheeler vehicles. The petitioners have to submit all documents physically with the Registering Authority for the purposes of registration of vehicles.
3. The issue pertains to the sale and registration of B-III compliant two-wheelers. It is submitted that as on 01.04.2017, only vehicles which are B-IV compliant are permitted to be sold. The petitioners contend that they have made transactions of sale prior to close of 31.03.2017, however, since they do not have the facility of online registration, they were required to register the vehicles physically in terms of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, and submit the vehicle documents within a period of one week of the sale having been completed.
4. It is submitted that by order dated 29.03.2017 in IA No.487/2017 in W.P.(C) No.13029/1985 titled M.C. Mehta v. Union of India & Others, the Supreme Court of India inter alia directed as under:-
(a) On and from 01st April, 2017, such vehicles that are not BS-IV compliant shall not be sold in India by any manufacturer or dealer, that is to say that such vehicles whether two wheeler, three wheeler, four wheeler or commercial vehicles will not be sold in India by any manufacturer or dealer on and from 01st April, 2017.
(b) All the vehicle registering authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are prohibited for registering such vehicles on and from 01st April, 2017 that do not meet BS-IV emission standards, except on proof that such a vehicle has already been sold on or before 31st March, 2017.
5. It is further submitted that this order dated 29.03.2017 has been clarified by the Supreme Court by judgment dated 13.04.2017 as under:-
"35. It appeared to us that if someone was to make a bona fide purchase of a BS-III compliant vehicle on or immediately before 31st March, 2017 it might not be possible for that individual to have the vehicle registered before the cut-off date. Therefore, we felt it reasonable to permit the registration of BS-III compliant vehicles purchased on proof on or before 31st March, 2017 from 01st April, 2017 and have ordered accordingly."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that all vehicles, subject-matter of the present petitions are BS-III compliant and were sold on or before 31.03.2017. Learned counsel submits that the said vehicles satisfy the conditions laid down by the Supreme Court by its order dated 29.03.2017.
7. It is further contended that the petitioners possess the requisite proof of the sale having been completed on 31.03.2017 inasmuch as in all cases, the online purchase of insurance policy was done prior to close of 31.03.2017. It is submitted that the transactions with regard to sale were completed prior to 31.03.2017.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that all transactions of the sale having been completed prior to 31.03.2017 along with all the requisite details, inter alia, the name, address of the purchaser along with the engine number, chassis number and identity proof details were submitted with the Transport Authority by 01st April, 2017.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in all cases, the online insurance policy has been issued prior to close of 31.03.2017 in the name of the respective purchaser.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that despite the petitioners having sold the vehicles prior to close of 31.03.2017 and submitting the requisite details with the respondents, the respondents ar
