Orissa

Rayagada

CC/267/2015

Sri V.Rama Rao - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Secretary Telengana Transport Dept - Opp.Party(s)

Self

17 Oct 2015

ORDER

      DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA

         

.                                          C.C. Case  No..   267/ 2015.

                                                           

 P R E S E N T .

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash, LL.B,                             President.

Smt. Ch.  Nirmala Kumari Raju, LLB,                    Member

V.Rama Rao,S/o Late V.V.Sundar Rao,Aged 77 years, Profession: Retd. Rly Employee, At: OMP Road, Rayagada, Po/Ps/ Dist. Rayagada, State: Odisha.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       …….Complainant

                                                            Vrs.

1. The Secretary, Telengana Transport Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telengana.      
2. The Regional Transport Officer, Tirumula Region, Hyderabad, Telengana.
3. The Regional Transport Authority, Rayagada, At/Po/Ps/Dist. Rayagada, Odisha.                                                                                        …..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                                           

For the complainant: In Person

For the O.Ps: self

                                                            JUDGMENT

                        The facts of the complaint  in brief is that  on 14.1.14 the complainant has purchased a vehicle Maruti Omini Van  from one Y.Rushi Kumar  vide Registration No./AP 09 AJ 4908 and the registration Certificate was valid up to 19.07.14. The complainant  purchased the vehicle with a belief that the R.C.Book is valid  and life time tax was paid but on verification  it could know that the registration was valid up to 19.07.2014 . The complainant approached the RTO ,Rayagada for transfer of R.C. Book and to accept the Tax. The RTO, Rayagada advised to obtain no objection certificate from Hyderabad. In the month of January the complainant went Hyderabad  and met the transport officer for  no objection certificate  and the Transport Officer insisted the petitioner to produce the vehicle but without road tax being paid it is not possible to take the vehicle from Rayagada to Hyderabad and it is not possible to run the vehicle without proper papers. Hence, the complainant prayed to direct the O.p to issue No Objection Certificate and  direct the R.T.A  Rayagada for accepting Road Tax and renewal of the R.C.Book on payment of proper fees. Hence, this complaint.

 

                        Being  noticed by this forum the opposite party  No.1 & 2  appeared and filed  written version denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars. The Opp.Party submits that the complaint is not maintainable as the dispute does not come under the purview of the Hon’ble Forum. The O.ps have not rendered any service to the complainant to come under the jurisdiction of the Forum. The opposite parties are government servants and there is no relationship of service provider and customer. The vehicle  AP09AJ4908 cannot be taken or shifted to any other place other than the State of Telengana without obtaining No Objection Certificate in Form-28 from the last registering authority and as the vehicle expired on 19.07.2014 the vehicle cannot be plied on the roads without getting the registration of the vehicle renewed. The vehicle was illegally shifted from Hyderabad without getting the registration renewed, without payment of Green tax  and without obtaining No Objection Certificate and the opposite parties are not aware of the place of living of the complainant or his status or his purchase of the vehicle. The opposite parties are government functionaries and they have discharged statutory responsibilities conferred by the MV Act 1988 and Rules  made thereunder and also the provisions of Telengana Motor Vehicles Taxation Act and Rules made thereunder. Unless a person complies with the statutory requirements his work cannot be attended. Hence the complaint deserves to be dismissed .

                        We perused the complaint petition and documents and heard the parties. After going through the  records it is found that  the complainant has not followed the proper procedure  and not obeyed the rules and regulations  of MV Act,1988 before shifting of the vehicle from Hyderabad to Rayagada. The submission of the Opp.Parties are genuine  as they are acting as per rule and we do not found any guilty from the side of the Opp.Parties. Hence, the complaint petition is having no merit and dismissed on contest.  Hence, it is ordered.

                                                                ORDER

                        The complaint petition is having no merit and  hence dismissed on contest. Parties to bear their own cost.

                        Pronounced in open forum today on this   3^rd  day of December,2015 under the seal and signature of this forum.

                         A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements , be forwarded to the parties    free of charge.

 

Member                                                                                               President

Documents relied upon:

By the complainant:

1. Xerox copy  of   Form No.30

By the Opp.Party:

1. Form 24
2. Regional Register e-service

 

                                                                                                 President