Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Allahabad High Court

VINAY PATHAKversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Decided

Holding

The petition was dismissed without adjudicating the merits, with the petitioner directed to seek remission by filing a fresh application under Rule 22‑A of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1998.

Summary

Vinay Pathak filed a writ petition seeking relief from road tax recovery for his vehicle (registration UP 54 T 8131) for the period December 2022 to May 2026, asserting that the vehicle was a total loss after a road accident and therefore unusable. The State of Uttar Pradesh contended that the tax demand was proper because the petitioner had not surrendered the vehicle’s registration documents. The Court observed that remission of tax is permissible if the petitioner can establish that the vehicle remained unusable, a question of fact that requires a proper administrative hearing. Consequently, the Court declined to decide the merits and dismissed the writ, directing the petitioner to file a fresh application before the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Mau, supported by an affidavit and relevant documents, to be decided under Rule 22‑A of the Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1998. A separate petition concerning another vehicle was dismissed as withdrawn.

Issues considered

  • Whether road tax liability can be imposed on a vehicle that has been declared a total loss and remains unusable.
  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to remission of road tax under the Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1998, given the alleged non‑surrender of vehicle documents.

Subjects

  • road tax
  • total loss vehicle
  • remission of tax
  • Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1998
  • Rule 22-A
  • writ petition
  • Uttar Pradesh
  • vehicle registration

Judgment

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                      WRIT TAX No. - 3832 of 2026

Vinay Pathak
                                                              .....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s)                   :   Sanjay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Respondent(s)                   :   C.S.C.

Court No. - 39
                 HON'BLE SAUMITRA DAYAL SINGH, J.
                 HON'BLE SWARUPAMA CHATURVEDI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel
for the State.


2. At the outset, the present writ petition is confined to the recovery of
road tax being made against the petitioner with respect to motor vehicle
bearing registration number UP 54 T 8131.


3. The challenge to the similar recovery with respect to vehicle bearing
registration number UP 54 AT 6150 involves completely different facts. It
involves a different cause of action. Accordingly, the writ petition filed
with respect to that vehicle, is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the
petitioner to file a fresh petition after impleading all necessary parties.
Insofar as vehicle bearing registration number UP 54 T 8131 is
concerned, it is the petitioner's case that the said vehicle met with a road
accident on 29.07.2022 and was rendered total loss. Arising from the
dispute with the insurer, the vehicle has not been repaired, till date.
Further, according to the petitioner, the vehicle is lying at the workshop.


4. In the meantime, the road tax authorities have initiated recovery against
the petitioner for the period 01.12.2022 to 31.05.2026. Since the vehicle is
described to have been rendered total loss and in any case it is not usable,
                                                                                              WTAX No. 3832 of 2026
                                                                     2


                                    at present, the petitioner claims that he is not liable to be charged road tax
                                    on the said vehicle for the disputed period 01.12.2022 to 31.05.2026.


                                    4. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel would submit that the
                                    petitioner has not surrendered the vehicle documents, in accordance with
                                    law. Therefore, at present, the tax liability has been correctly raised.


                                    5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the
                                    record, since the petitioner is entitled to claim benefit of remission of tax
                                    liability, if he is able to successfully establish that the vehicle has
                                    remained unusable from 01.12.2022 to 31.05.2026 and further, since that
                                    is a disputed question of fact, no useful purpose may be served in keeping
                                    this petition pending or calling for a counter-affidavit, at this stage.


                                    6. Accordingly, without entering into the merits, this writ petition is
                                    disposed of with a direction- subject to petitioner filing fresh application
                                    before the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Mau, supported by his
                                    personal affidavit, annexing thereto all relevant documents, within a
                                    period of two weeks from today, that application may be dealt with and
                                    decided with reference to Rule 22-A of the Motor Vehicles Taxation
                                    Rules, 1998, on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible, preferably
                                    within a period of two months.
                                    September 17,
                                    2026
                                    Shiv
                                                     (Swarupama Chaturvedi,J.) (Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.