Orissa high court quashes RTO order suspending truck registrations in sand transport case

CUTTACK: In a significant judgment, the Orissa High Court has quashed an order of the Jagatsinghpur Regional Transport Officer (RTO) suspending registration certificates of multiple Hyva trucks allegedly involved in illegal sand transportation.Considering a batch of petitions, Justice B P Routray ruled that the authorities had wrongly invoked provisions of Section 53 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, despite there being no material to justify such action.Terming the RTO’s order as “illegal and unauthorized,” Justice Routray on March 24 held that the authority lacked jurisdiction to suspend the registrations in the absence of statutory violations. It also dismissed objections on maintainability of the writ petitions, citing “clear and flagrant violation” of legal provisions.Accordingly, Justice Routray set aside all suspension orders, noting that the petitioners depend on the vehicles for their livelihood. The order was uploaded on March 28.The case stemmed from a joint enforcement drive conducted on November 27, 2025, during which 46 Hyva trucks and three excavators were seized for allegedly transporting sand from the Kilipal Sairat source in Jagatsinghpur district. Following the seizure, the RTO on December 11, 2025 suspended the registration certificates of the vehicles till March 31, 2026.

Challenging the move, eleven vehicle owners approached the high court, contending that their trucks had valid permits at the time of seizure. Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Akshay Kumar Pandey argued 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.”The transport authorities, however, defended their decision, maintaining that the vehicles were involved in unlawful transport activities and that the suspension orders were issued after due consideration of the owners’ representations.After perusing the FIR and counter affidavits, the court found no evidence suggesting violation of conditions required to invoke Section 53(1)(a) or (b). It observed that “there cannot be any dispute” regarding the validity of permits on the date of seizure.Justice Routray further ruled: “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.”Clarifying the legal position, Justice Routray said that while allegations of illegal sand transportation could invite action under other laws, “the same can never be construed in violation of the condition enumerated” under Section 53 of the Motor Vehicles Act.