Back
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, ASHUTOSH KUMAR
Shyam Prakash Meena, S/o. Shri Shiv Lal Meena – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India, Through Secretary To Government, Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways – Respondent
ORDER :
(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, CJ.)
1. Since these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raise common issue of law for consideration, therefore, they were heard analogously and are being decided by this common order. For brevity and convenience, wherever necessary, we shall refer to the pleadings and documents placed on record in Shyam Prakash Meena & Others Vs. Union of India & Others (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14258/2024) and Raja Ram & Others Vs. Union of India & Others (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6428/2024).
I. FACTS:
2. In all these petitions, the petitioners, who are transport operators, have assailed constitutional validity and vires of the provisions contained in Rule 81 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules of 1989’) as amended vide notification dated 04.10.2021 to the extent it seeks to levy “additional fee of fifty rupees for each day of delay after expiry of certificate of fitness”.
The petitioners are transport operators and they are required to keep their vehicles in a condition fit to operate on roads. The State has opened number of fitness testing centres where the vehicles are required
The imposition of an additional fee for delay in renewing fitness certificates is punitive and unauthorized under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The Central Government is empowered under Section 211 of the Motor Vehicles Act to levy additional fees for delayed applications related to driving licenses and vehicle registrations, which are not p....
Municipal Boards must justify licence fees based on actual services rendered; excessive fees may be deemed an illegal tax.
License fees can be regulatory rather than tied directly to specific services, requiring reasonable correlation with total expenses incurred.
Excise Authorities lack the power to levy interest on accumulated license fees under Section 49 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act; interest is chargeable only from the date a fee becomes due.
The court established that the imposition of delay fees by circular without statutory authority contradicts the principles of law, rendering such fees arbitrary and illegal.
The court ruled that imposing both Late Fees and General Penalties for GST return delays is improper; Late Fee suffices under applicable rules, reflecting legislative intent for compliance, not punit....
Sub-section (2) of section 479 upheld; Commissioner’s power to fix advertisement license fees with Corporation sanction not excessive delegation, as guidelines exist in statute, policy, and democrati....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
