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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74290

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J
K.Jaya – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India, The Government of Tamil Nadu, The Transport Commissioner cum State Transport Authority – Respondent
W.P.No.34407 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Petitioner: Mr.R.Natesan
For R1: Mr.S.Diwakar (CGSC)
For R2 & R3: Mr.S.Haja Nazirudeen, Mr.V.Nanmaran

The court upheld the validity of vehicle permit conditions as per statutory rules, rejecting challenges against the age limit for replacement and confirming adherence to the applicable Motor Vehicles Act provisions.

Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 88(9) - Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 - Rule 82(2) - All India Tourist Vehicles (Permit) Rules, 2023 - Writ petition for direction to remove conditions imposed on vehicle permits concerning replacement before 24.04.2025 - Imposition contrary to the Rules stated - Court affirmed statutory validity of imposed conditions based on the existing rules governing permit issuance. (Paras 2-38)

(B) Administrative power - Proper exercise - The court emphasized the importance of following existing rules regarding permits and conditions imposed therein, ensuring that the statutory rules are adhered to without arbitrary alterations. (Paras 11, 32)

Table of Content
1. petitioner's vehicles faced undue replacement conditions. (Para 2)

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein to remove the condition which had been additionally stamped/endorsed on the permits of the petitioner's vehicles bearing Registration Nos.TN-30-CF-5288 and TN-30-CF-5499, that the vehicles should be replaced by other vehicles on or before 24.04.2025.

2. The case of the petitioner is that she is the owner of the Contract Carriage Vehicles bearing Registration Nos.TN-30-CF-5288 and TN-30-CF- 5499, which are covered by a valid All India Tourist Permit granted by the 3rd Respondent herein. The base permits in respect of the said vehicles are valid from 16.07.2024 to 15.07.2029 to ply all over the Union of India. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd and 3rd Respondents herein had additionally stamped a condition onto the permits of the petitioner's vehicles stating that both of the vehicles should be replaced by other vehicles on or before 24.04.2025. Aggrieved by the imposition of the said condition, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Rule 4(5) of the All India Tourist Vehicles (Permit) Rules, 2023, stipulates the procedure for the grant of an All India Tourist Permit and renewal thereof, which reads as follows:

4. Procedure for grant of All India Tourist Permit and renewal thereof:-

……. (5) A tourist vehicle shall not be granted the All India Tourist Permit after the vehicle has completed twelve years from the date of first registration of the vehicle:

Provided that, in case of diesel vehicles registered in the National Capital Territory of Delhi, the All India Tourist Permit shall not be granted after the vehicle has completed ten years from the date of its first registration.”

5. Therefore, the petitioner states that the said rules explicitly state that no vehicle shall be granted the All India Tourist Permit if it has completed twelve years from the date of its first registration. Whereas, contrary to the aforesaid rule, the 2nd and 3rd Respondents herein had additionally stamped a condition onto the permits of the petitioner's vehicles stating that both of the vehicles should be replaced by other vehicles on or before 24.04.2025. Further, it is important to point out that no such endorsements curtailing the effective lifetime of the vehicles to eight years are made in the All India Permits granted in other States or Union Territories.

6. It is submitted that the 2nd and 3rd respondents had made the said endorsement by referring to Rule 82(2) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. Whereas, Rule 13 of the All India Tourist Vehicles (Permit) Rules, 2023, explicitly states that Rules 82 to 85A of the CMVR 1989 will not apply to the All India Tourist Permits, which is extracted hereunder:

13. Exemption.—

(1) The conditions prescribed in rules 82 to 85A of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 shall not apply to the All India Tourist Permits granted under these rules.

(2) The All India Tourist Permit issued under the Motor Vehicles (All India Permit for Tourist Transport Operators) Rules, 1993 or the All India Tourist Vehicles (Authorisation or Permit) Rules, 2021 shall continue to be in force during their validity period as if they were issued under these rules.

7. Despite the same, the 2nd and 3rd Respondents had made such an endorsement on the permits of the petitioner's vehicle, which is untenable and contrary.

8. A counter affidavit was filed by the 3rd respondent dated 23.01.2025.

9. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents 2 and 3 would submit that the petitioner has been granted tourist permits as defined under Rule 82(1) of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 in respect of two of her tourist vehicles as detailed below under Section 88(9)

of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 to be plied all over India.

10. The above-me

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 Back to top