Vehicle registration cancels after 15 years only for government vehicles; non-government vehicles don't apply, enabling ownership transfer.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the purchaser of an educational institution bus bearing registration No. KL-13-R-7585, which was acquired from the 3rd respondent, the Headmistress, GGHSS, Malappuram. The said vehicle was originally purchased by the 3rd respondent in 2007 with financial assistance raised by the Parent-Teachers Association of the school and contributions from well-wishers, and was registered with the 2^nd respondent on 20-8-2007, as an Educational Institution Bus (Unaided- EIB). The certificate of registration was valid up to 28.04.2023. It is contended that the vehicle is not government-owned and that no amount was expended by the Government for its purchase. The 3^rd respondent sold the vehicle on the expiry of the registration validity.

2. The petitioner submits that, upon purchase of the vehicle, an application for issuance of a fitness certificate was submitted before the 2^nd respondent. However, the same was rejected vide Ext. P2 communication dated 28.12.2023 on the premise that a vehicle owned by the Government loses its validity of registration on completion of fifteen years, by placing reliance on Rule 52A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 , inserted pursuant to the notification dated 16.11.2023 issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

3. It is contended that the vehicle in question is not a Government vehicle, as it was purchased entirely using funds mobilised by the Parent Teachers Association and well-wishers of the school. Ext. P1 certificate of registration itself describes the vehicle as an unaided educational institution bus and not as a Government vehicle. Therefore, the notification relied on in Ext. P2 has no application to the facts of the case. It is further submitted that the said notification does not prohibit the use of the vehicle by any other person or institution after the sale of the vehicle upon expiry of registration validity. It is submitted that without obtaining a fitness certificate, the registration of the vehicle cannot be transferred to the prospective purchaser, and therefore, the petitioner seeks to issue a fitness certificate by considering the application dated 4.12.2023, by quashing Ext. P2 communication. 4. The 2^nd respondent, in the statement filed, submits that the writ petition is not maintainable, either in law or on the facts. It is stated that the educational institution bus stands registered in the name of the Headmistress of Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Malappuram, and that the permit issued in respect of the vehicle describes it as a Government Educational Institution Bus. It is submitted that the vehicle was initially registered on 20.08.2007 and completed fifteen years from the date of initial registration on 19.08.2022. The 2nd respondent submits that, in view of Rule 52A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 , inserted pursuant to GSR 29(E) dated 16.01.2023, the certificate of registration of Government vehicles stands cancelled on completion of fifteen years, i.e. on 19.08.2022 and is not renewable thereafter. It is contended that, since the vehicle in question falls within the category of Government vehicles, the registration stood cancelled by operation of law and the application for a fitness certificate was therefore rightly rejected. It is further submitted that, in view of the statutory mandate, the only option available is the scrapping of the vehicle and that no direction can be issued to grant fitness or permit transfer of ownership.

5. The 3^rd respondent, in the statement filed, submits that the educational institution bus bearing registration No. KL-13-R-7585 was donated by two well-wishers to the Parent Teachers Association