SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3948

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. G. Ajithkumar, J
CLINT JOHNSON – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.VARGHESE PARAMBIL, SRI.ALBERT JOSEPH, SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH, SRI.T.K.KUNJUMON

JUDGMENT

The point to be decided in this case is whether the exclusion of ‘mentally retarded persons’ from the category of ‘physically handicapped persons’ in Ext.P3 notification issued by the Government by invoking the powers under Sec.22 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1976 (for short the, “Act,1976”) is discriminatory or not.

2. The short facts narrated in the writ petition are as follows: The petitioner is a mentally retarded person and the writ petition is filed through his guardian, his mother. A perusal of Ext.P1, the Standing Disability Assessment Board Certificate issued by the competent authority, will show that the petitioner is having mental retardation (moderate) and his permanent disability was assessed as 75%. It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner is fond of outings apart from that, if he is kept in the house itself, he often becomes restless and his behaviour sometimes becomes unpredictable. However, at the same time, it is very difficult for him to travel in the public transport system because of his physical disabilities. So, in order to integrate with the society, the parents of the petitioner thought of purchasing a motor car for his

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top