Back
2024 Supreme(Ker) 185
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N. Nagaresh, J.
Sebastian Jacob – Petitioner
Versus
The Transport Commissioner, Transport Commissionerate – Respondent
WP(C) No. 38402 of 2023
Decided On : 05-03-2024
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Aswin Gopakumar, Anwin Gopakumar, Aditya Venugopalan, Nikitha Susan Paulson, Shallet K. Sam, Saranya Babu, Mahesh Chandran
For the Respondent: Sri.Sreejith V.S., Government Pleader
The main legal point established is that the amended Section 15(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act mandates applicants renewing their driving licences after one year of expiry to undergo the test of competence to drive, overriding the provisions of Section 9(3).
Headnote:
Motor Vehicles Act - Renewal of Driving Licence - Section 9(3), Section 15(4)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks to challenge a circular issued by the respondent regarding the renewal of a driving licence. The petitioner applied for renewal of his driving licence after it had expired and was issued show-cause notices for not undergoing a competency road test as mandated by the circular.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, by applying for renewal after the expiry of the previous licence, was required to undergo the test of competence to drive as per the amended Section 15(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The court upheld the validity of the circular and dismissed the writ petition.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner was required to undergo a competency road test for the renewal of his driving licence, and whether the circular was in line with the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the amended Section 15(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act made it mandatory for applicants renewing their driving licences after one year of expiry to undergo the test of competence to drive. The court also noted the incongruity between Section 9(3) and Section 15(4) but emphasized the legislative intent behind the amendments.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition and allowed the respondents to proceed with the show-cause notices in accordance with the law.
JUDGMENT :
The petitioner seeks to declare that Ext.P9 Circular dated 15.10.2009 issued by the 1st respondent is ultravires the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and consequently quash the same by issuance of a writ of certiorari.
2. On 02.11.2000, the petitioner was granted Ext.P1 Driving Licence by the Regional Transport Officer, Puttur, Karnataka. Thereafter, the petitioner went to UAE for employment. Ext.P1 Driving Licence was valid up to 30.10.2020. From UAE, the petitioner obtained Ext.P2 Driving Licence from the licensing authority of UAE. Ext.P2 Driving Licence is valid up to 14.04.2026. The petitioner could not renew Ext.P1 Driving Licence due to Covid-19 pandemic.
3. The petitioner arrived in Kerala in the month of June, 2022 and applied for renewal of Ext.P1 Driving Licence on 15.07.2022. The 3rd respondent-Joint RTO renewed the licence extending its validity till 14.07.2032, as per Ext.P3. The petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application to replace his laminated Driving Licence with Smart Card Driving Licence. To the surprise of the petitioner, the petitioner was served with Ext.P6 show-cause notice dated 16.10.2023 which directed the petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent-Joint RTO within seven days and to furnish reply. The petitioner states that he was not in a position to appear before the 2nd respondent and therefore submitted Ext.P7 request seeking time to reply.
4. The 2nd respondent again issued Ext.P8 show-cause notice dated 30.10.20203. On enquiry, the petitioner learnt that the show-cause notice has been issued as the petitioner did not undergo a competency road test while renewing his licence, as mandated in Ext.P9 Circular No.9/2019 dated 15.10.2019.
5. The petitioner states that Ext.P9 Circular is clarificatory in nature. As per Ext.P9 Circular, any person applying for renewal of Driving Licence after one year of expiry but before five years, will have to submit an application for learners licence and the applicant will have to undergo driving test and competency road test to get the licence renewed.
6. The petitioner points out that as per Section 9(3) (a)(i) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, no such test shall be necessary where the applicant produces proof to show that the applicant has previously held a Driving Licence and that the period between the date of expiry of that licence and that of the application does not exceed five years. The petitioner further pointed out that as per proviso to Section 15(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, if the application is made, more than one year after the Driving Licence has ceased to be effective, the licensing authority shall refuse the renew the Driving Licence unless the applicant undergoes and passes the test of competence to drive.
7. According to the petitioner, a conjoint reading of Sections 9(3) and 15(4) would show that the applicants applying for renewal of Driving Licence need not undergo such tests if the application has been preferred after one year of expiry but before five years.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents.
9. The petitioner was granted Ext.P1 Driving Licence by the RTO, Puttur on 02.11.2000. The licence is valid from 31.10.2000 to 30.10.2020. The petitioner could not renew Ext.P1 licence before the period of its expiry. The petitioner submitted application for renewal of Driving Licence on 15.07.2022. The Joint RTO, Koduvally granted renewal and issued Ext.P3 renewed Driving Licence with issue date 02.11.2000 and valid up to 14.07.2032.
10. When the petitioner submitted an application to replace his laminated Driving Licence with Smart Card Driving Licence, the petitioner was issued with Ext.P6 show-cause notice alleging that the renewal of his Driving Licence was illegal. By Ext.P8 communication, the petitioner was required to furnish Fitness Certificate in Form 1-A.
11. The petitioner contends that renewal of Driving Licence is stated to be illegal as the
