NASHEELI WINE SHOP ROOP NAGAR JAMMU TH JAGJIT SINGH AND ANOTHER v. U T OF J AND K TH SECRETARY TRANSPORT DEPTT AND OTHERS
WP(C)/1551/2022 · 2025-10-06
Sanjay Dhar
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12347 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 12347 (JK) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
Case:- WP(C) No.1551/2022
Nasheeli Wine Shop Roop Nagar Jammu & Anr. ….. Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Vishal Goel, Advocate
Vs
UT of J&K & Ors. .….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Eishaan Dadhichi, CGSC
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE
ORDER (06.10.2025)
1. The petitioners, through the medium of present petition,
have sought a direction upon the respondents to comply
with order No.PS/DS/04/2019, dated 17.02.2020 and to
refund the excess amount of Road/Token Tax collected
from them.
2. As per the case of the petitioners, the actual liability on
account of registration charges and token tax of the
vehicle of the petitioners was Rs.20,700/- only but the
petitioners were made to deposit an additional amount of
Rs.1,03,272/- against his liability of Rs.20,700/-. It has Serial No. 23
2
WP(C) No.1551/2022
been submitted that in the registration certificate, an
amount of Rs.20,000/- only has been reflected.
3. It has been further submitted that an order came to be
issued by the Finance Department of J&K bearing No.
PS/DS/04/2019, dated 17.02.2020, according to which
the new rates of registration of vehicle were made
applicable with effect from 04.08.2019 and the vehicle for
which the applications were received till 03.08.2019 were
directed to be registered at the pre-revised rates. It has
been submitted since the petitioner had made
application on 1st August 2019, therefore amount
chargeable was as per the pre-revised rates.
4. Respondent No.4 Shri Jasmeet Singh, Regional Transport
Officer, Jammu is present in person. He has submitted
that in case the petitioner makes an application for refund
of excess amount, if any, charged by the respondent
authority, the same would be considered by the said
respondents in the light of order No.PS/DS/04/2019,
dated 17.02.2020. Thereafter, if any excess amount has
been deposited by the petitioner, the same would be
refunded to him forthwith.
5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a
direction to respondent No.4 to refund the excess amount
that may have been deposited by the petitioner to him in
3
WP(C) No.1551/2022
the light of order No. PS/DS/04/2019, dated 17.02.2020
within a period of 15 days from the date the petitioner
makes an application to him in this regard.
(SANJAY DHAR) JUDGE JAMMU
06.10.2025
Sneha