Point of Law: Motor Vehicle - Power/jurisdiction for assigning a new registration mark on a vehicle - Assignment of new registration mark but deem it proper to reiterate that if vehicle once registered in any State in India, it shall not be required to be registered elsewhere in India, but when Motor Vehicle registered in one State, has been kept in another State for a period of exceeding 12 months, owner shall apply to the Registering Authority within whose jurisdiction vehicle is for the assignment of new registration mark, this is as provided under Sections 46 and 47 of Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT :

ALI MOHAMMAD MAGREY, J.

1. The common issue raised in these two writ petitions is proposed to be decided by common order.

2. In these two writ petitions challenge is made to circular bearing No. RTO/K/Estt/85-95 dated 27.03.2021, issued by respondent No. 3-RTO, Kashmir, in terms whereof, the vehicle owners, who have purchased their vehicles from outside Jammu and Kashmir Union Territory bearing outside registration mark, are asked to apply for a new registration mark as per the provisions of Sections 47 and 50 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Rule 54 of Central Motor Vehicle Rules 1989 within 15 days from the date of Circular/notification viz. 27.03.2021, failing which action as warranted shall be initiated against them.

Brief Facts:

3. Petitioner in WP (C) No. 669/2021, claims to be the owner of vehicle bearing registration No. DL-4C-NB-6748, purchased at Delhi and registered under Transport Authority Government of NCT Delhi, usually travels to Delhi for various purposes as also rest parts of the country, therefore, submits that in terms of provisions of Motor Vehicle Act and Rules, no assignment of new registration mark is required with application of Sections 47 and 50 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short Act of 1988) and petitioner in WP (C) No. 777/2021, claims to be owner of vehicle bearing registration No. DL3CD 9392, having purchased the same outside Union Territory of J&K, before some months back is registered under Transport Authority Government of NTC, Delhi.

4. Petitioners while in Srinagar along with vehicles, are stated to be harassed by the Police/Transport Department, merely on the ground of having the Delhi registration number on the vehicles and on ascertaining the reasons they were informed about the circular aforesaid, issued by respondent No. 3, therefore, being aggrieved, challenge the same on the following grounds:-

(a) That the impugned Circular has been issued purportedly on the basis of the provisions as contained under section 47 and 50 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988.

It is submitted that the perusal of Section 47 would reveal that the power/jurisdiction for assigning a new registration mark on a vehicle is within the power/jurisdiction of the Central Government. In absence of the delegation of the powers otherwise vesting with the Central Government, the respondents have no authority to issue a Circular under challenge in terms of the instant Petition. In other words, it is submitted that the impugned Circular has been issued without jurisdiction, as such, is liable to be quashed.

(b) That the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is a self-contained Code in itself providing the entire mechanism for the implementation and execution of the said Act. the Petitioner state and submit that Section 47 of the Act, has prescribed the entire mode and method for seeking and for assigning the new registration mark on the vehicles removed from one State to other. The said scheme as contained in Section 47 of the Act, has prescribed a time limit of more than 12 months for a vehicle removed from one State to other for inviting the implementation of Section 47. In other words for the implementation of Section 47 and for the assigning of a new Registration Mark, the vehicle removed from one State to other must have been kept in the state for a continuous period of more than 12 months. In the instant case, the impugned Circular is neither in accordance to the Scheme envisaged in Section 47 of the Act nor is clear with respect to the implementation of the said section over a particular class of vehicles. Hence, the impugned circular is against the scheme of Section 47 and hence is liable to be quashed.

(c) That for the implementation of Section 47, the owner of a vehicle has been mandated to apply to the registering authority under whose jurisdiction the vehicle at the time of exceeding of the prescribed period of more than 12 months is situated for the purpose of the assignment of a new registration mark. Therefore,