Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
M/S Chhagan Singh Contractor vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:37664) on 22 August, 2025
[2025:RJ-JD:37664]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15907/2025
M/s Chhagan Singh Contractor, Rayta Khera, Beawar (Raj)
Through Its Proprietor Tilok Singh S/o Chhagan Singh, Aged
About 40 Years, R/o Rayta Khera, Beawar (Raj) Registered
Owner Of Vehicles Bearing Registration No. Rj 36 Ga 9036, Rj 36
Ga 9037 And Rj 36 Ga 5684.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Transport
Department Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur
(Raj).
2. The Commissioner, Department Of Transport And Road
Safety, Jaipur (Raj).
3. Regional Transport Officer, Pali (Raj).
4. Regional Transport Officer, Beawar (Raj).
5. District Transport Officer, Pali (Raj).
6. District Transport Officer, Beawar (Raj).
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Khadav
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sajjan Singh Rathore, AAG
Ms. Neelam Sharma, AGC
Ms. Sonal Parihar for
Mr. B.L. Bhati, AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL BENIWAL
Order
22/08/2025
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
controversy raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered
by the judgment passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.9721/2025 : Kanwar Singh and Ors. Vs. State of
Rajasthan and Ors. (decided on 28.07.2025). A Co-ordinate
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 07:45:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37664] (2 of 4) [CW-15907/2025]
Bench of this Court at Jaipur in the said writ petition after hearing
the parties disposed of the writ petition with following directions:
“11. In the considered opinion of this Court,
unless and until the allegation of overloading is
established by physically weighing the vehicles,
the registration of subject vehicles cannot be
suspended. Therefore, the impugned orders are
not sustainable in the eyes of law. In case, it is
found that there has been an alteration in the
make/design of the vehicles, it is the bounden
duty of the transport authorities, prior to
passing any suspension order, to direct the
owner/driver of the vehicles to produce their
vehicles for inspection.
12. The case of the respondents is that
notices were sent to the petitioners through
registered post prior to passing the aforesaid
impugned order, however, the petitioners
dispute the factum of service of notice upon
them. Under these circumstances, this Court
deems it just and proper to dispose of all these
writ petitions by issuing directions to the
petitioners to produce their vehicles before the
Transport Department, who will examine and
inspect the vehicles’ make and design and in
case any mechanical alteration is found, a
detailed inventory shall be prepared and
appropriate orders shall be passed strictly in
accordance with law and simultaneously, in case
no alteration in the make and design of the
vehicles is found, the vehicles shall be released
forthwith. The petitioners are directed to
produce their vehicles within a period of one
month before the respective DTOs who passed(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 07:45:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37664] (3 of 4) [CW-15907/2025]the order of suspension of registration of the
subject vehicles.
13. Before parting with this order, it is made
clear that the order of suspension of registration
of the vehicles shall be passed by the Transport
Department, only after physical verification of
the vehicles, including weighing and
measurements of such vehicles that too solely
in the cases where overloading is found and
established upon such verification. The
registration of vehicles should not be suspended
based merely on the allegations of overloading
on the basis of data or information received
from the Department of Mines. The respondents
are further directed to grant interim permission
to the petitioners for the limited purpose of
presenting their vehicles before the respective
DTOs on a particular day. This interim period
shall be valid only for carrying the vehicles to
the respective office of DTO for the aforesaid
verification/inspection and shall not authorize
the vehicles to ply on the road for any other
purpose.
14. With the aforesaid observations and
directions this batch of writ petitions stands
disposed of. Stay applications and all pending
applications, if any, also stand dismissed.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present
writ petition may be decided in the same terms as above.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed
the submission made on behalf of the petitioner, however, not in a
position to refute the fact that issue in the present writ petition is
identical to the one adjudicated in Kanwar Singh (supra).
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 07:45:45 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:37664] (4 of 4) [CW-15907/2025]
4. In view of the submission made and in view of the order
passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court dated 28.07.2025 in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 97/2021, the writ petition is
disposed of in the same terms as the said writ petition. The
petitioner shall make the vehicle available for physical verification
before the concerned DTO on or before 20.09.2025.
5. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand(s) disposed of.
(SUNIL BENIWAL),J
20-Ashutosh/-
(Downloaded on 25/08/2025 at 07:45:45 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)