Tax and penalties under the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act are only justified for vehicles that are actually used on the road, and legal provisions must support the reality of vehicle non-use.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. The petitioner, in the present writ petition, challenges the demand notice dated 05.08.1997 issued by the Regional Transport Officer, Mayurbhanj, the appellate order dated 08.10.1999 passed by the Collector, Mayurbhanj, and the revisional order dated 25.02.2010 passed by the Transport Commissioner, Odisha.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. Succinctly put, the facts of the case are as follows:

(i) The Odisha Forest Development Corporation Limited, a Government of Odisha undertaking, owns a tourist bus bearing registration No. OSM- 906, registered with the Regional Transport Officer, Mayurbhanj. The said bus is under the control of the Divisional Manager, Karanjia, and is used for carrying tourists in the Similipal Tiger Reserve.

(ii) In the year 1995, the vehicle went out of order and required major repairs. Intimation to that effect was given to the Regional Transport Officer, Baripada, vide letter No. 319 dated 27.01.1995, requesting that the vehicle be kept off the road with effect from 01.02.1995. The original Registration Certificate was also surrendered along with the said letter.

(iii) The Divisional Manager, Odisha Forest Development Corporation Limited, Karanjia, addressed a letter bearing No. 1070 dated 05.04.1995 to the Regional Transport Officer, Baripada. Thereafter, a reminder letter bearing No. 2551 dated 08.09.1995 was addressed to the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Baripada, to inspect the vehicle for immediate repair. The said communication was followed by another reminder letter bearing No.2773 dated 11.10.1995.

(iv) Subsequently, another letter bearing No. 2948 dated 27.10.1995 was addressed to the Motor Vehicle Inspector along with the estimate of repair obtained from an automobile workshop. This was followed by another communication dated 04.12.1995. Thereafter, the vehicle was inspected on 18.02.1996, and a letter bearing No. 3 dated 20.02.1996 was received from the office of the Regional Transport Officer, Mayurbhanj, certifying the approximate cost of repair and spare parts to be Rs.57,800/-.

(v) The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, with whom the vehicle was insured, issued a renewal notice dated 18.01.1996.

(vi) However, the vehicle could not be repaired due to financial constraints. Consequently, the Divisional Manager, Karanjia, addressed a letter bearing No. 198 dated 24.01.1997 to the Regional Transport Officer, Mayurbhanj, requesting that the vehicle be kept off the road up to 31.01.1998. The requisite Form-H covering the periods from 01.02.1996 to 31.01.1997 and from 01.02.1997 to 31.01.1998 was also submitted.

(vii) The vehicle remained unused continuously with effect from 01.02.1995. The Registration Certificate had been surrendered with the Regional Transport Officer, and the insurance policy was not renewed thereafter.

(viii) Subsequently, a communication bearing No. 501 dated 14.02.1997 was received from the Regional Transport Officer, Mayurbhanj, informing the petitioner that the off the road intimation for the period from 01.02.1997 to 31.01.1998 was not accepted on the ground that the earlier off the road period was valid only up to January, 1996, and that tax along with penalty was due for the period from February, 1996 to February, 1997.

(ix) Thereafter, the Regional Transport Officer issued a demand notice bearing No. 2778 dated 05.08.1997, demanding a sum of Rs. 3,01,871/- towards motor vehicle tax for the period from February, 1995 to June, 1997.

(x) Aggrieved by the said demand, the Corporation preferred an appeal before the Collector-cum-Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Mayurbhanj, registered as OMVT Appea