Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi, J.

1. In filing this Writ Petition, the Petitioner claiming herself to be the registered owner of the vehicle in question bearing registration No.OD- 01-W-4499 (Truck), has sought for a direction from this Court to the Regional Transport Officer, Balasore/Opposite Party for sending the challan dated 28.03.2023 issued in respect of the above noted vehicle, to the concerned Transport Magistrate Court for disposal. Apart from the above, the Petitioner has also sought for a direction from this Court to the Opposite Parties for granting necessary fitness and permit certificate in respect of the above noted vehicle.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:

2. The brief fact of the case, in nutshell, is that due to some alleged unlawful activities challan in question dated 22.08.2023 to the tune of Rs.52,000/- as per the provision under Section 179(1), 180, 181 & 194(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act was issued in respect of the above vehicle while it was being driven by the Petitioner from Jharsuguda to Balasore. After issuance of the challan dated 22.08.2023 since the Opposite Party did not send the said challan to the concerned Transport Magistrate for its disposal, the Petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:

a) Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions, as borne out from the Written Note of Submissions: Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the vehicle in question has not been involved in any activity constituting a violation of law, nor has the Petitioner committed any violation of the statutory provisions governing the use and operation of motor vehicles. It is contended that the challan dated 22.08.2023 has been issued in respect of the said vehicle on the allegation of certain unlawful activities; however, the same has been issued in a mechanical manner without affording the Petitioner, who is the registered owner of the vehicle, a fair and meaningful opportunity to defend himself before the competent forum.

b) Learned counsel submits that the Petitioner, being the registered owner of the vehicle, is entitled to avail the statutory remedy available under the law by contesting the allegations before the learned

Transport Magistrate. It is further contended that the basic principle of natural justice, namely audi alteram partem, mandates that no person should be condemned unheard. Therefore, when an allegation of violation has been made through issuance of a challan, the authority concerned is under a corresponding legal obligation to place the matter before the competent judicial authority so as to enable the affected person to contest the allegations in accordance with law. It is further submitted that despite the earnest and repeated efforts made by the Petitioner to ascertain the status of the challan and to secure an opportunity to contest the same before the competent court, the Opposite Party authorities have failed to transmit the said challan to the learned Transport Magistrate for its adjudication. Such inaction, according to learned counsel, has resulted in an anomalous situation where the challan remains pending without being subjected to judicial scrutiny, thereby depriving the Petitioner of his legitimate right to defend himself and establish his innocence before the competent forum.

c) Learned counsel further contends that the prolonged inaction on the part of the authorities has caused serious prejudice and hardship to the Petitioner, as the vehicle in question continues to remain under the shadow of the said challan without any adjudication on its merits. It is further argued that the failure of the authorities to place the challan before the competent court within a reasonable time defeats the very purpose of the statutory procedure prescribed under the law and is also contrary to the principles of fairness, transparency, and

procedural p