THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA WRIT PETITION NOS.83973/2009 & 83998/2009 (T-MVT) Between: The Divisional Controller NWKRTC Bijapur Its Chief Law Officer Central office, Gokul, Hubli. … Petitioner (By Sri Subhash Mallapur, Advocate) And: The Regional Transport Authority Bijapur. … Respondent (By Sri A. Syed Habeeb, AGA) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quashing the impugned endorsement dated 23.8.2007 issued by the respondent as at Annexure-A and the appellant authority order of dismissal in appeal No.Tax.APL14/2007 dated 10.3.2008 as at Annexure-E to the writ petition and etc. These petitions coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ Group, this day, the Court made the following:

2 O R D E R Heard learned Counsel appearing for both parties. The petitioner/NWKRTC in these petitions is challenging the demand made by the R.T.O. to pay tax in respect of two buses purchased by the petitioner. 2. Fact is, the petitioner had two Sleeper Coach Buses bearing registration Nos.MH-12/DG-6551 and MH- 12/DG-6553 on lease basis from M/s.Corona Bus Manufacturer’s Private Limited of Pune, Maharashtra, for the purpose of trial for a period of two months. Subsequently, after the trial period, the vehicles were purchased and the respondent/authority was requested to assign new registration mark and also to transfer the vehicle in the name of NWKRTC, Bijapur. But the respondent/authority insisted for production of Form No.60 in duplicate prescribed under the Income Tax Act and to pay tax for the period under which the vehicles were run on lease basis and to pay tax in respect of the period of

3 which tax was paid by the previous owner to his State (1.9.2006 to 31.5.2007). An endorsement was given as per Annexure-A in respect of the vehicle bearing registration No.MH-12/DG-6551. The petitioner challenged the endorsement before the Regional Transport Officer and Registering Authority, Bijapur by way of appeal. Said appeal came to be dismissed. The endorsement dated 23.8.2007/Annexure-A and the order of dismissal of the appeal dated 10.3.2008/Annexure-E are sought to be quashed. 3. It is not the case of the petitioner that the vehicle is either parked for non-payment of the tax or they are running the vehicles on road without getting the vehicle transferred to their name. 4. In that view of the matter, by efflux of time, the contention raised by the petitioner becomes infructuous. Hence, the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. However,

4 liberty is reserved to the petitioner to work out their remedy if the dispute between the parties is not resolved. Sd/- JUDGE KNM/- CT-SI