- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) Very short point involved in this writ petition is that whether the vehicles in question, which, according to the writ petitioner are the "Off Highway Vehicles and Equipments" and are used by the petitioner exclusively inside his mines, require registration as motor vehicles under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules applicable in the State of Jharkhand being Bihar Motor Vehicles Rules, 1992.
(3.) According to learned counsel for the petitioner, petitioner's these vehicles are exclusively used in the mine premises of the petitioner and they do not ply on the public roads and not only this, but according to learned counsel for the petitioner, these equipments are not suitable for plying on the road. It is submitted that such type of vehicles are not motor vehicles as per the definition given under Sub Section 28 of Section 2 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In spite of this, the registering authority i. e. , District Transport Officer is intending to seize suchequipments for which the petitioner gave letter to the said authority on 28.06.2012. It is also submitted that even in one of the mines, equipments were seized and the petitioner had to pay the claimed amount of tax and penalty to the tune of Rs. 1 crore. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that since the petitioner cannot get adjudication upon the issue whether the equipments which the petitioner is claiming not the motor vehicle, are motor vehicles or not and, therefore, petitioner approached this Court.;