IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

W.P.(C) No.24157 of 2025

Kamala Sethy ..... Petitioner

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Patra,

Advocate

-versus-

State of Odisha & Anr. ..... Opposite Parties

Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel for

Transport Department

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SANJEEB K. PANIGRAHI

Order ORDER

04.09.2025

No.

01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid

arrangement.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the

Petitioner with the following prayer:

“Therefore, the petitioner most respectfully

prays that this Hon’ble Court may be graciously pleased enough to admit this writ petition, issue rule NISI calling upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the VCRs under Annexure-2 series issued /drawn against the Vehicle of the petitioner bearing Regd. No. OD29D8289 shall be transmitted to the Court of learned J.M.F.C.(Transport), Cuttack for disposal of the same as per law, And if the Opposite Parties do not show cause or show

Signature Not Verified

insufficient cause the rule may be made absolute by issuing appropriate writ directing the O.P No.2 to transmit/forward the VCRs under Annexure-2 series to the Court of learned J.M.F.C.(Transport), Cuttack within a stipulated time;

And further, be pleased to pass any appropriate writ(s)/order(s), direction(s) as this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper under the facts &

circumstances of the case And for this act of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.”

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that this Court has earlier decided the similar issue in the judgment dated 15.01.2014 passed in W.P.(C) No.1500 of 2004 (Anjana Babulal Darabad vrs. Commissioner, S.T.A. & Ors.) and batch of Writ Petitions. Hence, he submits that this Writ Petition may be disposed of in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Anjana Babulal (supra).

5. Learned counsel for the Opposite Parties submits that they have no objection, if this matter is disposed of in the light of the judgment passed in the case of Anjana Babulal (supra).

6. On perusal of the records and the judgment passed in the case of Anjana Babulal (supra), it appears that similar issue has already been decided by this Court in the said Signature Not Verified judgment which was disposed of on 15.01.2014. The ordering portion of the said judgment is as follows:

“ xxx xxx xxx v) Pending such approval, direction is hereby given to the OMVD Officers issuing the VCR to direct the driver/owner/person in possession and control of motor vehicle either compound the offence on payment of prescribed fine offline/online or to appear before the STA/RTA and produce the demanded documents for disposal of VCR within fifteen days, failing which the VCR issuing officer will submit prosecution report before the court having jurisdiction, namely, Transport Magistrate/J.M.F.C./ S.D.J.M. for adjudication of the VCR within fifteen days from the date on which compounded fine was to be paid. The Transport Magistrate/ JMFC/SDJM may allow compounding of the offences, strictly in conformity with the Gazattee Notification No. No.1151 dated 29.09.1995. As prescribed under Rule 139 of C.M.V. Rules, 1989, the owners/driver/conductor may also send Xerox coy of R.C./I.C./Permit/D.L. and any other relevant documents duly attested by Police Officer or any other officer to the officer who demanded the documents by registered post within fifteen days from the date of issue of VCR.

xx x xx x x ”

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the Signature Not Verified judgment passed in the case of Anjana Babulal (supra), this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Opposite Party No.2 to transmit the V.C.Rs under Annexure-2 series in respect of vehicle No.OD29D8289 to the court of learned J.M.F.C. (Transport), Cuttack for disposal as per law.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

(Dr. Sanjeeb K. Panigrahi)

Judge Gitanjali Signature Not Verified