[2026:RJ-JP:1776] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 639/2026 1. Yuvraj Singh S/o Ranveer Singh, Aged About 37 Years, R/o Silarpuri Buhana Jhunjhunu, (Rajasthan). Registered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. RJ18GC0081. 2. Rajendra Prasad Verma S/o Chhitar Mal, R/o Korseena Korsina Jaipur, (Rajasthan). Registered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. RJ42GA9935. 3. Ramswaroop Swami S/o Sugadas, R/o Dhani Gamadas Jagalpura Teh Neem Ka Thana Sikar, (Rajasthan). Regis- tered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. RJ32GB1075. 4. Bajrang Das Swami S/o Dip Das Swami, R/o Adasar Rawansar Teh Lunkarnsar Bikaner, (Rajasthan). Regis- tered Owner Of Vehicle Registration No. RJ07GC5079. ----Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Transport Department Of Rajasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Secretary. 2. Department Of Mining And Geology, Government Of Ra- jasthan, Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Joint Secretary. 3. Commissioner, Transport Department, Government Of Ra- jasthan, Jaipur. 4. Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office Sikar, District Sikar. (Rajasthan). 5. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Jhunjhunu, District Jhunjhunu. (Rajasthan). 6. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Sujangarh, District Churu. (Rajasthan). 7. Regional Transport Officer, Rto Office Bikaner, District Bikaner. (Rajasthan). 8. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Tonk, District Tonk. (Rajasthan). 9. District Transport Officer, Dto Office Kotputali, District Kotputali- Behror. (Rajasthan). ----Respondents [2026:RJ-JP:1776] (2 of 3) [CW-639/2026] For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Surjeet Singh For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sachin Singh Rathore on behalf of Mr. S. S. Naruka, AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 15/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for both the parties are in agreement that the controversy involved in the present matter is squarely covered by the judgments passed by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court in the matters of Kanwar Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.1 and Mustak & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.2 2. In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, since there is serious dispute about the service of notice prior to suspension of registration certificates, as the petitioners deny the service, whereas the respondents claim due service of notice. Be that as it may, while keeping the said issue open, with the consent of the parties, the suspensions are set aside, as the said vehicles are the source of bread and butter for the petitioners and their families. 3. However, the aforementioned setting aside/revocation shall only be effective subject to the condition that the petitioners will produce their vehicle before the Transport Department, who will examine and inspect the vehicles’ make and design; and in case any mechanical alteration or overloading is found, a detailed in- ventory shall be prepared and appropriate orders shall be passed strictly in accordance with law. 1 S.B. C.W.P. No.9721/2025 2 S.B. C.W.P. No.20073/2025 [2026:RJ-JP:1776] (3 of 3) [CW-639/2026] 4. This arrangement shall be valid only for carrying the vehicles to the respective office of DTO for the aforesaid verification/in- spection and shall not authorize the vehicle to ply on the road for any other purpose. 5. The petitioners, along with their vehicles concerned, shall re- port to/ before the respective DTO who passed the order of sus- pension of registration of the subject vehicles, on 27.01.2026, preferably between 11:00 A.M. to 01:00 P.M. Thereafter, due reply shall be filed within a period of 15 days by the petitioners. 6. Audience with respect to the same will be provided by the competent authority on 11.02.2026. Adjudication of the same shall be carried out thereafter within a period of 15 days. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 8. Any other pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) dis- posed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J SOURAV /66