1 / 3 2025:CGHC:2425 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 217 of 2025 1 - SBJ Project Pvt Ltd., Through Its Director Amit Bansal S/o Suresh Kumar Bansal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o H. No. 15, Friends Colony, Near Dhimrapur Chowk, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Transport, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 – Commissioner, Transport Department Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - District Transport Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Adv. and Mr. Vikram Kumar Sharma, Adv. For Respondents/State : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 15/01/2025 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has purchased a loader vehicle and got it registered with the registering authority at Raigarh, C.G. and also paid lifetime tax 2 / 3 and after some time, the vehicle was not in use. The DTO, Raigarh has issued certificate whereby certified that the said vehicle has been destroyed/scrapped and is permanently in capable of use and its registration was cancelled on 31/08/2021 and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for refund of the balance amount of tax under the provisions of Section 14(2)(b) of the Chhattisgarh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1991 (for short "Act of 1991"). Petitioner has submitted an application in this regard before the registering authority Raigarh on 18.10.2024, however, till date the balance amount of tax has not been refunded nor the decision has been taken on the application and therefore direction be issued to Respondents No. 2 and 3 to take decision on the pending application at the earliest. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking direction to be issued to Respondents No. 2 and 3 to take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner, he is having no objection. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Perusal of documents and pleadings would show that petitioner initially purchased a loader vehicle and got it registered with the registering authority at Raigarh and also paid lifetime tax and after some time, the vehicle was not in use. The DTO, Raigarh has issued certificate whereby certified that the said vehicle has been destroyed/scrapped and is permanently in capable of use and its registration was cancelled on 31/08/2021. Petitioner has submitted an application for refund of tax on 18.10.2024 which 3 / 3 appears to be submitted prior to registration of vehicle. 5. In the aforementioned facts of the case, this writ petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before Respondents No. 2 & 3 in prescribed format for refund of the balance tax amount, in accordance with the Act of 1991 and if such an application is submitted, Respondents No. 2 & 3 shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law, expeditiously within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of application. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar