Orissa High Court
Ashok Kumar Swain vs State Of Odisha And Others …. Opposite … on 24 March, 2026
Author: B.P. Routray
Bench: B.P. Routray
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & W.P.(C) No.1952, 1959, 2160,
2254, 2679, 2682, 2765, 3760, 4162, 4178 of 2026
(An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India)
In W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025
Ashok Kumar Swain .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.1952 of 2026
Tushar Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.1959 of 2026
Ramakanta Barik .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.2160 of 2026
Sagar Sahoo .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 1 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.2254 of 2026
Debaprasad Samantray .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.2679 of 2026
Dillip Kumar Khatua .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.2682 of 2026
Dipak Kumar Samantray .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.2765 of 2026
Subhadarshini Enterprises,
Jagatsinghpur
.... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 2 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.3760 of 2026
Manabhanjan Malla .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.4162 of 2026
Sobharani Sutar .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
In W.P.(C) No.4178 of 2026
Debendra Kumar Panda .... Petitioner
Mr. A.K. Pandey , Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate for Transport Authorities
Advocate(s) appeared in these cases:-
For Petitioners : Mr. A.K.Pandey, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Mr. U.R.Jena, AGA
Mr. P.Behera, Advocate
(for Transport Authorities)
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 3 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
CORAM : JUSTICE B.P. ROUTRAY
JUDGMENT
24th March 2026
B.P. Routray,J.
1. Heard Mr. A.K.Pandey, learned counsel for the
Petitioners, Mr. P.Behera, learned counsel for Transport
Authorities and Mr. U.R.Jena, learned AGA for State-
Opposite Parties.
2. All the Petitioners are the owners of different
vehicles, i.e. Hyva bearing respective registration numbers.
The common case of the Petitioners is that the registration
certificate of those vehicles have been suspended till 31 st
March 2026 in exercise in the power under Section 53(1)(b) of
the Motor Vehicles Act, 1998.
3. Mr. Pandey, learned counsel for the Petitioners
submit that the allegations levelled against the vehicles are
that they all were transporting illegal sand from Kilipal Sairat
Source in the District of Jagatsinghpur. As such, Tirtol P.S.
Case No.0605 has been registered alleging commission of
offences under Section 51(1) of the Odisha Minor Mineral
Concession Rules, 2016, Section 12 of the Odisha Minerals
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 4 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
(Prevention of Theft Smuggling and Other Unlawful
Activities) Act, 1988, Section 303(2)/ 317(2)/ 112/ 326(b)/
3(5) of BNS and Section 31(A)/ 33(A) of the AIR (Prevention
and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981. In total 46 numbers of
Hyva vehicles and three excavators were seized by a joint
team of Police, Mining and Transport authorities. Mr. Pandey,
further submits that the suspension of registration certificate in
terms of Section 53 of the M.V.Act is not attracted in the
present case since all the vehicles are having valid permit on
the date of their seizure, i.e. on 27th November 2025.
4. The Transport Authorities have filed their counter in
all the cases taking the common stand that all such vehicles
were seized on 27th November 2025 and their registration
certificates have been suspended in exercise of the power
under Section 53 (1)(b) of the M.V.Act.
5. Mr. Behera, learned counsel for Transport
Authorities submits that as the FIR has been lodged alleging
commission of such offences against the vehicles, the
suspension of their registration certificate cannot be
considered as violative of the powers conferred on the
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 5 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
Registering Authority in that respect. He further submits that
the unauthorized use of the vehicles in transporting illegal
sand empowers the authority to proceed for suspension of their
certificate by exercising the power under Section 53 of the
M.V.Act read with the Rules. He further submits that the order
under Section 53 passed by the Registering Authority is
appealable as per Section 57 of the M.V.Act.
6. Keeping the nature of dispute as common in all the
writ petitions, it appears that all the vehicles were having their
valid permit on the date of their seizure, i.e. on 27th November
2025. There cannot be any dispute to such facts. As per the
counter affidavit filed by Regional Transport Officer, since the
vehicles were in indulged in carrying goods in contravention
of the provision of Section 53(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, their registration certificates have been suspended
after considering the representation submitted in respect of
each owner. It is seen from the averments made in the counter
affidavit that the direction for suspension of registration
certificate of the vehicles has been exercised as per the power
conferred on the authority under Section 53 of the Motor
Vehicles Act. It is important here to reproduce the Section 53
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 6 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
of the M.V.Act, which reads as follows:-
53. Suspension of registration- (1) If any registering
authority or other prescribed authority has reason to
believe that any motor vehicle within its jurisdiction-
(a) is in such a condition that its use in a public place
would constitute a danger to the public, or that it fails to
comply with the requirements of this Act or of the rules
made thereunder, or
(b) has been, or is being, used for hire or reward without
a valid permit for being used as such,the authority may, after giving the owner an opportunity
of making any representation he may wish to make (by
sending to the owner a notice by registered post
acknowledgement due at his address entered in the
certificate of registration), for reasons to be recorded in
writing, suspend the certificate of registration of the
vehicle-
(i) in any case falling under Clause (a), until the
defects are rectified to its satisfaction; and
(ii) in any case falling under Clause (b), for a
period not exceeding four months.
(2) An authority other than a registering authority shall,
when making a suspension order under sub-section (1),
intimate in writing the fact of such suspension and the
reasons therefor to the registering authority within whose
jurisdiction the vehicle is at the time of the suspension.
(3) Where the registration of a motor vehicle has been
suspended under sub-section (1), for a continuous period
of not less than one month, the registering authority,
within whose jurisdiction the vehicle was when the
registration was suspended, shall, if it is not the original
registering authority, inform that authority of the
suspension.
(4) The owner of a motor vehicle shall, on the demand of
a registering authority or other prescribed authority
which has suspended the certificate of registration of the
vehicle under this section, surrender the certificate of
registration.
(5) A certificate of registration surrendered under sub-
section (4) shall be returned to the owner when the order
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 7 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
suspending registration has been rescinded and not
before.
7. A bare perusal of aforesaid provisions stipulates that
in such conditions as described under Clause (a) or (b) of Sub-
section 1 of Section 53, the registration certificate of the
vehicle may be suspended by granting an opportunity of
representation to the owner.
8. In the given facts of the present cases, as stated
earlier, the validity of permit granted in favour of respective
vehicles on 27th November 2025 is not disputed by the
Transport Authority. So when the permit granted in respect of
the vehicle was valid on the date of seizure of the vehicles,
then there is nothing on record to justify the direction for
suspension of registration certificate applying the provisions
under Section 53 of the M.V. Act. The story narrated in the
FIR does not speak anything with regard to violation of such
provisions under clause (a) or (b) or any such action alleged
against Petitioners’ vehicles to debar them from continuing
with the registration. Upon going through the facts of the case
including the recitals of the FIR and the averments made in the
counter affidavit, no such ground is revealing to authorize the
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 8 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
Registering Authority to exercise the power under Section 53
of the M.V.Act to suspend the registration certificate of the
vehicle. It is stated in the counter affidavit at Para-7 and 8 as
follows:-
7. That it is humbly submitted the vehicle of the
petitioner was seized by the police on 26.11.2025 on
the allegation of various criminal offences and the
offences committed under Odisha Minor Mineral
Concession Rules as per the F.I.R. dated 26.11.2025.
As the vehicle of the petitioner was indulged in
carrying goods in contravention of provisions of
Section 53(1)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, show
cause notice dtd.27.11.2025 (Annexure-7) was issued
to the petitioner for suspension of Registration
Certificate of the vehicle.
8. That after considering the show cause reply of the
petitioner the opposite party No.3 vide order dated
11.12.2025(Annexure-9) has suspended the Certificate
of Registration of vehicle OD-21-S-7588 in exercise of
power conferred U/s.53 of the M.V.Act.
9. So it is clear from above narration of facts that, the
authority is lacking power in absence of the satisfaction of
violation of such conditions stated in both the Clauses of Sub-
section 1 of Section 53. It is therefore unwarranted on the part
of the Registering Authority to proceed for suspension of
registration certificates invoking the power under Section 53
of the M.V. Act. It is admitted that the allegations pertaining
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 9 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
to the vehicles is only regarding transportation of sand from
illegal Sairat source. When the permit of the vehicle is
admitted to be valid on the date of seizure, no occasion arose
on the part of the authority to proceed under Section 53 of the
M.V. Act to suspend the registration certificate of the vehicle.
It is made clear that transportation of illegal sand from
unauthorized source may attract the offence under Odisha
Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 2016 and other offences
under different other statutes, but the same can never be
construed in violation of the condition enumerated in both the
Clauses of Sub-section 1 of Section 53 of the M.V. Act.
Without any specific action alleged against the vehicles as to
endanger the public or failing to comply the requirements of
the Act and Rules or being hired or used for reward without a
valid permit, the provisions of Section 53 is not seen to have
attracted in present facts of the case to invoke the power of the
authority to suspend the registration certificate. Accordingly,
such action of the Registering Authority is termed as illegal
and unauthorized.
10. So far as to avail the provisions of appeal under
Section 57 of the M.V. Act is concerned, in view of the clear
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 10 of 11
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SANGRAM DAS
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 28-Mar-2026 11:38:46
and flagrant violation of the statutory provisions under Section
53 to satisfy the requirement to attract such provision against
the vehicles to suspend their registration certificates, which is
apparent on the record, the writ petition filed before this Court
cannot be said as not maintainable only for the reason of the
provisions available to appeal against the impugned order. As
per the submissions of the Petitioners they are earning their
livelihood by running such vehicles and therefore, it would be
inappropriate on the part of this Court to send these matters to
the Appellate Authority without entertaining the prayer of the
Petitioners.
11. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and the
impugned orders of suspension of registration certificate in
respect of the vehicles of all Petitioners are quashed.
(B.P. Routray)
Judge
S.Das, Sr.Steno
W.P.(C) No.36409 of 2025 & batch Page 11 of 11
