WP(C)/26077/2026 of SIDHARTHA KUMAR SAHOO Vs STATE OF ODISHA on 17 August 2026

ORDER

17.08.2026 Order No.

01.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner as well as Mr. P Behera, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department. Perused the writ application as well as the documents annexed thereto.

3. The Petitioner has filed the present writ application with the following prayer: “Therefore, it is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to admit the case of the petitioner and issue notice to the opp.parties to waive out the total challan of the vehicle bearing Regd. No.OD-14-G-2707 Bus (Express Vehicle). And/or to pass any other order (s) which deems fit and proper for adjudication of the case.”

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at the outset contended that the Petitioner is the registered owner of a bus bearing registration number OD-14-G-2707. She further contended that the bus is plying on a commercial route and in respect of such route a permanent permit has been granted in favor of the owner of the vehicle by the State Transport Authority. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that such permit issued in favor of the Petitioner was valid when the vehicle in question was issued with challan for violation of the rules. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, drawing attention of this Court to the documents at Annexure-1 series, further contended before this Court that the bus was plying with all valid documents like RC Book, valid permit, etc. She further contended that the vehicle in question has been issued with 33 traffic challans for over- speeding near the humps in the route from Cuttack to Paradip. Such challans have been issued on different dates starting from the year 2024. Copies of the challans have been filed along with the writ application, marked as Annexure-2 series. Learned counsel for the Petitioner at this juncture contended that the Petitioner is ready and willing to settle the dispute with the Transport Authorities. Although learned counsel for the Petitioner wanted to dispute some of the challans issued in respect of the vehicle in question, however, he has expressed desire for an amicable settlement of the dispute by compounding the offences as is permissible under the law.

5. Mr. P. Behera, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department, in the aforesaid context, submitted before this Court that under Rule 167 of M.V. Rule for violation of any traffic rule, the vehicle is to be issued with an e-challan and the same is to be paid to the State as per the mode provided under such Rules. He further submitted that in the event that the Petitioner disputes genuineness of some of the challans then, as per the provision laid down in Rule 167, the Petitioner can always file an objection within 45 days from the date of issuance of such challans. In the instant case, the Petitioner has not filed any objection before the competent authority raising any objection with regard to issuance of such e- challans. It was also contended by the learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department that the Petitioner, despite issuance of several challans, has not deposited the fine amount with the Authorities.

6. In the context of compounding of the offences, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department referred to the notification of the Commerce & Transport Department, Government of Odisha, No.3822/C&T, dated 12.03.2026, and submitted before this Court that the Government of Odisha in the Commerce & Transport Department has come up with the aforesaid notification for settlement of traffic challan cases in the National Lok Adalat, 2026 and that the same shall come into force from the date such notification is published in the Odisha Gazette. Taking into consideration the eligibility and the offence that has been provided under the MV Act, 1988, a table has been prescribed at Annexure-1 to the notification. For better appreciation, such table is extracted herein below;

Sl. No. Section (MV Act,

Offence/ Description Amount payable under settlement/compounding

General Offence 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

177A Rules of Driving regulation violation Rs.500

Travel without ticket (Sec. 3(b)) 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

179(1) Disobedience of order of authorities 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

179(2) Refuse to supply information willfully 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

182-B Oversized vehicles Rs.5,000

183(i) Driving LMV with excess speed Rs.1,000

183(ii) Driving HMV/MMV passenger with excess speed Rs.2,000

184(a) Jumping red light Rs.1,000

184(b) Violating stop sign Rs.1,000

184(c) Using mobile phone while driving Rs.1,000

184(d) Overtaking at no overtaking zone Rs.1,000

184(e) Driving against flow of traffic Rs.1,000

184(f) Driving in any manner that would be dangerous Rs.1,000

Driving when mentally or physically unfit 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

190(2) Violating air and noise pollution 50% of penalty prescribed under MV Act (as reflected in challan)

Using vehicle without registration Rs.2,000

Allowing person to drive vehicle without valid/proper DL Rs.2,500

Driving vehicle without valid DL Rs.2,500

194B(1) Driver or passenger Rs.500

Page 6 of 7. without seat belt

194C More than one pillion rider on two-wheeler Rs.500

194D Driving without helmet Rs.500

194E Not providing way for emergency vehicles Rs.5,000

Plying without insurance Rs.1,000

192-A Using vehicle without permit Rs.5,000

194(1) Driving vehicle exceeding permissible weight (overloading) Rs.10,000 and Rs.1,000 per tonne of excess load

As per the aforesaid table, the case of the Petitioner falls under Sl. No.8, i.e., for violation of the provision contained in Section 183(ii) of the MV Act, 1988 with regard to HMV/MMV passenger driving with excess speed. Although the fine amount prescribed in the statute is Rs.4,000/-, however, the same can be compounded by paying Rs.2,000/- as per the said notification. In such view of the matter, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Department submitted before this Court that in the event the Petitioner pays the aforesaid fine amount and seeks for compounding of the offences, the case of the Petitioner shall be considered strictly in terms of the notification dated 12.03.2026.

7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, at this juncture consented to the compounding of the cases in terms of the notification dated 12.03.2026, and submitted that the Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the fine amount as has been prescribed at Sl. No.8 of the table at Annexure-1 of notification dated 12.03.2026.

8. Considering the submissions made by the leaned counsels appearing for both sides, further taking into consideration the submission made by learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is ready and willing to compound the offences in terms of the notification dated 12.03.2026, this Court deems it proper to dispose of the writ petition at this stage of admission by directing the Opposite Parties to permit the Petitioner to compound any traffic related offences in terms of notification dated 12.03.2026, at Annexure-1. In the event the Petitioner approaches the Opposite Parties for compounding of such offences and deposits the necessary fees, such offences be compounded within a period of four weeks.

9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the writ application stands disposed of.

Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per Rules.

( Aditya Kumar Mohapatra )

Judge

S.K. Rout

Digitally Signed Signed by: SANTANU KUMAR ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 18-Aug-2026 18:47:24 Signature Not Verified