0IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.7908 of 2025 Shaikh Mozibur Raheman …. Petitioner Mr. Manas Ranjan Khatua, Advocate -versus- Regional Transport Officer, Jharsuguda …. Opposite Party Mr. Pravakar Behera, Standing Counsel for Transport Department CORAM: DR. JUSTICE S.K. PANIGRAHI Order No. ORDER 21.03.2025 01. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard Mr. Khatua, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Behera, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department. 3. Assailing the action of the R.T.O., Jharsuguda/ Opposite Party, in demanding tax and penalty, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is an auction purchaser and he is not liable to pay any penalty. Thus issuance of notice demanding penalty is bad in law. 5. Section 12 of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1975"), deals with Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 24-Mar-2025 18:05:02 Signature Not Verified liability of successor to pay arrears. The same is quoted hereunder; "12. Liability of successor to pay arrears- (1) If the tax leviable in respect of any motor vehicle unpaid by any person liable for payment thereof and such person before having paid the tax has transferred the ownership of such vehicle or has ceased to be in possession or control of such vehicle, the person to whom the ownership of the vehicle has been transferred or the person who has possession or control of such vehicle shall be liable to pay the 'said tax to the Taxing Officer. (2) Nothing contained in this section shall be deemed to affect the liability of the person who has transferred the ownership or has ceased to be in possession of control of such vehicle, for payment of the said tax." 6. On a conspectus of Section 12(1) of the Act, 1975, it is evident that the transferee of the vehicle is liable to pay unpaid tax in the event the same has not been paid by the owner of the vehicle. 7. In Bachan Singh v. The Road Transport Officer, Rourkela, and others1, a Division Bench of this Court, succinctly dealt with the law on the subject. It was held that a transferee of the vehicle or the person who is in possession of control of the vehicle shall be liable to pay the arrears of tax payable by the previous owner or the person who had possession or control of such vehicle and remained unpaid at the time of transfer of the vehicle. 1 2009 (II) OLR 183 Digitally Signed Signed by: GITANJALI NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: OHC Date: 24-Mar-2025 18:05:02 Signature Not Verified 8. Thus, the irresistible conclusion is that the Petitioner is only liable to pay tax. 9. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Opposite Party/Regional Transport Officer, Jharsuguda to accept the tax and thereafter transfer the vehicle in the name of the Petitioner in accordance with law. 10. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. (Dr. S. K. Panigrahi) Judge Gitanjali