The main legal point established in the judgment is that the instructions dated 22.6.2017 were not contrary to the directions issued by Hon'ble the Apex Court and were intended to prevent bypassing the guidelines, emphasizing the importance of compliance with the directions related to vehicle registration.

JUDGMENT

Daya Chaudhary, J. - This order of mine shall dispose of two writ petition bearing Nos. 22319 and 15786 of 2017 as common question of law and facts are involved in both the cases. For the sake of convenience, the facts have been extracted from C.W.P. No. 22319 of 2017.

2. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of instructions dated 22.6.2017 (Annexure P-1) issued by respondent No.1 contrary to instructions dated 9.2.2009 (Annexure P-2) issued by Government of India. A further prayer has also been made for directing respondents to re-register/transfer the ownership of pre-owned BSIII complaint vehicles, in the name of the petitioners, as the same had been purchased and to get NOC from the competent authority, the vehicles were registered in other States much earlier to 31.3.2017.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out in the present petition are that the petitioners purchased pre-owned BS-III vehicles prior to 31.3.2017 and also got 'No Objection Certificate' as well as fitness inspection certificate after depositing requisite fee from the concerned authorities. After obtaining all necessary documents for transfer of ownership of the vehicles, the petitioners presented the same before Regional Transport Authority, Nuh, Haryana. As per case of the petitioners, initially an assurance was given to re-register the vehicles after getting verification from the concerned quarter but on one pretext or the other, the matter was kept pending. Subsequently it was informed to the petitioners that ownership of the vehicles cannot be re-registered/transferred in view of instructions dated 22.6.2017 (Annexure P-1) issued by Transport Commissioner, Haryana.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioners contends that respondent-authorities are misinterpreting instructions dated 9.2.2009 issued by Government of India and also the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 13029 of 1985 titled as M.C. Mehta v. Union of India and others, wherein, it has been observed that no BS-III vehicles after 31.3.2017 would be sold and registered but BS-III vehicles purchased before 31.3.2017 would stay in use. Learned senior counsel further contends that as per instructions dated 3.3.2015 issued by Government of Haryana, four wheelers manufactured prior to 1.4.2010 complying with BS-III Mass emission standards can be re-registered on transfer in the NCR Districts like Faridabad, Gurugram, Mewat, Rohtak, Sonipat, Rewari, Jhajjar, Panipat, Hisar, Karnal, Yamuna Nagar and Kurukshetra. He also contends that there is no bar in re-registering BS-III vehicles sold and registered prior to 31.3.2017 as per provisions of section 50 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is also the contention of learned senior counsel that as per provisions of Section 50 Sub Clause(II) "in the case of a vehicle registered outside the State, within forty-five days of the transfer, forward to the Registering Authority, referred to in Sub Clause-I. The petitioners produced all the requisite document including 'No Objection Certificate' issued by the concerned authority but their request for registration was not accepted because of instructions dated 22.6.2017. At the end, learned senior counsel contends that the same issue was there before the Delhi High Court in the case of Sandeep Sindhwani and others v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and others 2017 (3) RCR (Civil) 498 and the instructions dated 22.6.2017 issued by Government of Haryana is contrary to the judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in MC Mehta's case (supra) and liable to be quashed.

5. In response to notice of motion, reply on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 has already been filed and the same is on record.

6. Learned State counsel submits that keeping in view the spirit of the directions issued by Hon'ble the Apex Court and by virtue of notification dated 19.8.2015 issued by the Ministry of Ro