Important Points:
To secure orders from this Court for reclassification of the vehicle covered by Ext.P2 certificate of registration as Educational Institution Bus, suppressing the fact that the said vehicle is lying idle since 01.09.2016, as it is not roadworthy, and that the fitness certificate of the said vehicle had expired on 03.06.2016, has to be viewed seriously-By suppressing those material facts, it has falsely been stated in paragraph 6 of the writ petition that, even after the lapse of more than two years from the date of Ext.P4 proceedings, the reclassification of the vehicle as Educational Institution Bus has not been done by the 1st respondent, as a result of which, the petitioner is compelled to run the vehicle on payment of tax applicable to Contract Carriage. The attempt made by the petitioner was to use the said vehicle, which was discarded to road use as a contract carriage, as an Educational Institution Bus, showing scant regard to the safety of the children (which should be the prime concern of a school, while providing transportation facility to its children) in flagrant violation of Circular No.08/2017 dated 23.02.2017 of CBSE, a copy of which was marked to all Principals and Managers of the schools affiliated to CBSE, for information and compliance, along with the Director of Secondary Education of all States, etc.

Ma'din Public School at Melmuri in Malappuram District, a school affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (for brevity 'CBSE'), represented by its Principal Shri. Saidalavi Koya, is the petitioner in this writ petition. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1st respondent Regional Transport Officer, who is the Registering Authority, to effect reclassification of vehicle bearing registration No.KL-07/AD-708 as Educational Institution Bus, without any further delay, on the strength of Ext.P4 proceedings.

2. On 03.07.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Senior Government Pleader sought time to file statement.

3. 1st Respondent has filed a counter affidavit opposing the relief sought for in this writ petition. The petitioner has also filed a reply affidavit.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 1st respondent Regional Transport Officer and also for the additional 2nd respondent Transport Commissioner.

5. As per Ext.P2 certificate of registration dated 04.07.2016 issued by the 1st respondent, the petitioner is the registered owner of a Contract Carriage (LMV) bearing registration No.KL-07/AD-708, with effect from 27.06.2016, which is a 2001 model TATA 407 vehicle with a seating capacity of 20 in all. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the petitioner purchased the said vehicle, on 27.06.2016, to be used for the purpose of transportation of its students. Based on Ext.P1 notice of transfer of ownership dated 27.06.2016 in Form 29, the 1st respondent issued Ext.P2 certificate of registration, after effecting transfer of ownership of the vehicle, in the name of the petitioner, with effect from 27.06.2016, as per the provisions of Rule 55 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989.

6. On 27.06.2016, along with Ext.P1 notice of transfer, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 application to alter the class of the vehicle as Educational Institution Bus and grant permit accordingly. Based on that application, the 1st respondent, by Ext.P4 proceedings dated 27.06.2016, accorded sanction for altering the class of Contract Carriage bearing registration No.KL-07/AD-708 as Educational Institution Bus, and directed the petitioner to produce the vehicle before the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector for inspection, along with the records of that vehicle, after making necessary alteration. As evident from Ext.P5 receipt dated 30.06.2016, the petitioner has remitted Rs.50/- towards alteration of motor vehicle (permission), Rs.150/- towards transfer of ownership and Rs.90/- towards service charges. As per Ext.P6 receipt dated 01.07.2016, the petitioner has remitted a sum of Rs.3,000/- towards compounding fee of LMV Contract Carriage.

7. Going by the averments in paragraph 6 of the writ petition, even after the lapse of more than two years from the date of Ext.P4 proceedings, the reclassification of the vehicle as Educational Institution Bus has not been done by the 1st respondent, as a result of which, the petitioner is compelled to run the vehicle on payment of tax applicable to Contract Carriage. Paragraph 6 of the writ petition reads thus;

“6. However even after a lapse of more than nearly two years from the date of Exhibit.P4 proceedings the reclassification of the vehicle as Educational Institution Bus has not been done so far by the respondent as a result of which the petitioner is compelled to run the vehicle on payment of tax applicable to contract carriage vehicle and hence left with no other efficacious or alternative remedy the petitioner is preferring this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on the following among other:-”

(underline supplied)

8. Grounds A to E of the writ petition read thus;

“A. The respondent has no reason to effect alteration of class of vehicle of Bus No.KL-07AD-708 even after complyin