38.6c New Delhi, India, Saturday, February 21, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Imposition of Special Fees for Allotment of Fancy Numbers is Contrary to the Motor Vehicles Act 1998, says Amicus Curiae to SC

By Shreya Tulavi      21 August, 2020 08:20 PM      0 Comments
Imposition of Special Fees for Allotment of Fancy Numbers is Contrary to the Motor Vehicles Act 1998, says Amicus Curiae to SC

In the matter concerning payment of special fee against allotment of special registration numbers for vehicles, senior advocate Manoj Swarup has submitted before the Supreme Court in front of the division bench comprising of Justices L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra Bhat, that the state governments are not empowered to charge additional fees for the registration unless given in the Motor Vehicles Act.

The written submission has been filed against the Madhya Pradesh government opposing the state appeal and stating that the notification issued by the government is ultra vires Section 41 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1998. He submitted that section 41 of the MV act contemplates application for registration of Motor Vehicles and lays down steps until final registration, including the registration fees. The same stipulates any fees that may be charged for allotment as is done by the state government as given in section 41(6) of the act.

Regarding the fees for the attachment of other documents and information, Swarup submitted that it has been clearly mentioned in section 41(2) for the fees incurred during the process by the central government and the state government does not have the power to levy any fees apart from that. It can be seen that - State government has assumed to itself the function of allotment.

He further enumerated that the rule-making power of the central and the state government has been clearly defined. It has been pointed out in Sub-section (o) of Section 64 (Power of Central Government to make rules) of the Act specifically contemplates the power of the Central government to determine the fees and other issues. Further, the provision is specifically excluded from Section 65 (Power of State Government to make rules) of the Act, thus indicating that the powers given to the centre are not given to the state also.

The written submission also contained that there is no specific authorization in act to levy fees in the name of registration of special numbers. The state government cannot charge the vehicle owners in the name of special numbers. However, in section 64(h) and 65(k) of the Act allows the state government to prescribe fees but that too only under certain circumstances, which nowhere relate to the registration fees.

Similarly, it states that the reference of Section 211 of the Act has been submitted that the same is placed in Chapter XIV of the Act, titled "Miscellaneous", as against section41(2) of the act. It is important to note that this additional fee goes against the objective of the Motor Vehicles Act. This act was enacted with the objective of bringing a uniform regime throughout the country. However, by the imposition of fees by the Madhya Pradesh government the entire objective of the act is demolished.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

homoeopathy-practitioner-cannot-prescribe-allopathy-medicines-telangana-hc
Trending Judiciary
Homoeopathy Practitioner Cannot Prescribe Allopathy Medicines: Telangana HC [Read Order]

Supreme Court holds homoeopathy practitioners cannot prescribe allopathy drugs; Telangana HC quashes FIR on procedural lapse under NMCA.

20 February, 2026 11:28 AM
contractual-bar-on-interest-claims-overrides-interest-act-kerala-high-court-order-set-aside-sc
Trending Judiciary
Contractual Bar on Interest Claims Overrides Interest Act; Kerala High Court Order Set Aside: SC [Read Order]

Supreme Court rules that contractual clauses barring interest claims override the Interest Act, setting aside Kerala High Court’s order on delayed payments.

20 February, 2026 11:43 AM

TOP STORIES

sc-declines-to-entertain-plea-over-alleged-anti-muslim-remarks-by-assam-cm-says-approach-hc
Trending Judiciary
SC Declines to Entertain Plea Over Alleged Anti-Muslim Remarks by Assam CM, Says Approach HC

Supreme Court asks petitioners to approach Gauhati High Court over alleged hate speech by Assam CM, declines plea for FIRs and SIT probe.

16 February, 2026 02:52 PM
can-live-in-partner-be-prosecuted-under-section-498a-ipc-sc-to-decide-scope-of-husband-in-cruelty-law
Trending Judiciary
Can Live-In Partner Be Prosecuted Under Section 498A IPC? SC To Decide Scope Of ‘Husband’ In Cruelty Law [Read Order]

Supreme Court to decide if a man in a live-in relationship can be prosecuted under Section 498A IPC for cruelty. Case to impact scope of “husband”.

16 February, 2026 03:33 PM
sc-sets-aside-anticipatory-bail-granted-to-absconding-murder-accused-in-madhya-pradesh-political-rivalry-case
Trending Judiciary
SC Sets Aside Anticipatory Bail Granted To Absconding Murder Accused In Madhya Pradesh Political Rivalry Case [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court sets aside anticipatory bail to absconding murder accused in MP political rivalry case, calls HC order perverse and unjustified.

16 February, 2026 03:59 PM
places-of-worship-act-does-not-protect-illegal-encroachments-on-government-land-madras-hc
Trending Judiciary
Places of Worship Act Does Not Protect Illegal Encroachments on Government Land: Madras HC [Read Order]

Madras High Court rules that Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not protect temples built on encroached government land; eviction upheld in Ramanathapuram case.

16 February, 2026 04:18 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email