[CLYDE]

I just heard that people who got their licences before they were 18 years old, back in the days gone by (and as late as the late 1980s) are having their licences cancelled when they apply for renewal - the reason being that they were underage when they got their first licences. RTOs are referring to their dates of birth and cross-referencing them with the date on which they were awarded their first DLs, and if there is even a day less than 18 years in the gap, the licence is cancelled. What follows is something that only the Indian government officer could think of!

The hapless driver is then told to apply for a learner's licence, learn to drive all over again (with all the rules that apply to learners, in the bargain) and then appear for a driving test after 30 days of holding the said learner's licence. Some people like these have been driving for more than 30 years now!

RTOs all over the country issued licences to people 16 years and older back in the late 1980s, when they gave declarations of driving with good intent signed by their parents. Now, these same people are being told that they can no longer drive!

So folks, watch out for some senior citizens with 'L' boards on their vehicles, driving perfectly, but with the necessity of having their son or daughter (aged 18 or more), who holds a permanent licence by their side (as required by RTOs for learner-licence holders) to keep a careful eye on Dad's/Mom's driving. Can there be anything more foolish???

What our rule-bound lawmakers should have done was give the person a spot test and ascertain whether he can drive WELL (not fast / rashly) observing all the road rules and niceties of the road. If he does, renew his licence, without all the numerous trips required to RTOs, head-banging against walls, pillars and officials and associated activities that lay a heavier burden on an already over-burdened mind. If RTO officers really passed applicants after ascertaining their knowledge of what good driving entails, I am sure that more than 90% of our drivers would never be allowed to unlock a car, let alone get onto the roads. Sad state, but true.

[HillMan]

Looks like the RTO have too much time at hand.

Even at age 16, I am sure the license was issued after the necessary tests. Forcing to go through LL process is utter stupidity.

If this change is being followed across the nation, then this is something that came from the center. The local RTO guys are just following the rules helplessly. I am sure, it only creates extra work for them and also get some badmouthing.

[4x4addict]

This happened in TN as well. Many people in my town got their licenses below 18 years old by paying *extra fees*. When their licenses came up for renewal, it was cancelled and they had to go through the LR process again and pay more *extra fees* :-)

[audioholic]

AFAIK, For people under 18, the only licence issued by the RTO, at least Karnataka RTO was for the class of vehicle - "Non-Geared Motorcycle with engine capacity <50cc". Not sure if the RTO was previously issuing other classes also.

So if one had to get a licence, at that age it would be for the said class. For any other class of vehicle, one has to reappear for driving test. The new class of vehicle will be licenced only after the test, and from that date. So I think those who have got licence for Light Motor Vehicle or MotorCycle With Gear at 16 should worry. I got my LMV and MCWG only at 18 though I had availed an LL for Motorcycle without gear at 16 and after that they stopped issuing DL at 16.

[GrammarNazi]

Those licenses would've been rendered non-legal the day the following MV Act disallowing such procedure was passed. Subsequently they would've given a public notice that such licenses were cancelled, and holders need to re-apply. Nobody would've cared to comply. Since there was no integration or smart cards when that MV Act was passed, it would've been impossible to lay guidelines to impose the rule, so they would've assumed the public notice absolves legislators from creating any further provisions.

I guess people will have to apply afresh.

[el lobo 6061]

I got my license when I was 16 yrs but only class of vehicle that I was allowed at that time was MCWOG(Motor Cycle Without Gear) which is below 50 cc like those scooty Pep.

What I can infer is that people who got license for cars or even motorcycle with gear before they were 18 yrs and are getting them renewed are being asked to apply new. This maybe due to computerization of data since basically it would be programmed to give license for classes MCWG(Motor Cycle With Gear) & LMV(Light Motor Vehicle) and above after 18 yrs but previous analog data had that given before 18 yrs of age. Conflicting data resulting in error.

In a way good, what goes around comes back around.

[hellmet]

Isn't this how western nations treat renewal of driver licenses too ? In the US, you generally don't receive a license with validity more than a few years and you have to retest and show your skills every time you apply for renewal.

I don't think it's much effort to re-qualify once every 30 years

[HillMan]

Originally Posted by hellmet

I don't think it's much effort to re-qualify once every 30 years

You are right about the renewal in western nations and I'll be happy if they did here too. At least it will be a little hassle for those who bought their license.

I had a DL for motorcycle without gear at 16 then upgraded to LMV and Motorcycle with gear at 18. There was no issues at renewal. It was just an application and the smart card was posted to me within a month.

[Mr.Boss]

Looks like RTO found a way of increasing their revenue / 'Income'

If they are more concerned about the 18+ rule, instead of cancelling their current license and asking to apply for LLR why don't they conduct the test immediately and renew the license?

[Diamond_dawg]

Originally Posted by hellmet

In the US, you generally don't receive a license with validity more than a few years and you have to retest and show your skills every time you apply for renewal.

Depends on the state, in Minnesota you have to have give the test again if you fail to renew the license within a couple days of expiring. otherwise its direct renewal

[sohail99]

Originally Posted by hellmet

Isn't this how western nations treat renewal of driver licenses too ? In the US, you generally don't receive a license with validity more than a few years and you have to retest and show your skills every time you apply for renewal.

I don't think it's much effort to re-qualify once every 30 years

If a retest is done here(with no 'extra fees') and licenses cancelled/renewed on basis of that, I bet 80-90% ppl on the road will lose their licenses!
(If they consider following traffic rules, road discipline and respect for pedestrians, a big part of getting a driving license, not just the ability to drive a car!)

Thereby, solving the traffic problem as well!

[zenren]

Originally Posted by sohail99

If a retest is done here(with no 'extra fees') and licenses cancelled/renewed on basis of that, I bet 80-90% ppl on the road will lose their licenses!

I highly doubt it. We are the world experts in beating a system and the trouble makers on the road are not the rookie drivers who just started driving.

If the bad drivers need to appear for a re-test, they'll do so and drive very carefully in front of the inspector to get the license renewed and go back to their old style from the next day! Almost all the rash drivers know how to drive carefully to beat the system and get the license renewed.

[noopster]

Originally Posted by CLYDE

I just heard that people who got their licences before they were 18 years old, back in the days gone by (and as late as the late 1980s) are having their licences cancelled when they apply for renewal - the reason being that they were underage when they got their first licences.

What's the source of your information? And is this valid for Karnataka alone?

RTOs are referring to their dates of birth and cross-referencing them with the date on which they were awarded their first DLs, and if there is even a day less than 18 years in the gap, the licence is cancelled. What follows is something that only the Indian government officer could think of!

This part is a little unclear to me. As far as I know, the driving age has always been 18 across India. People who procured DLs before this age did so by falsifying their birthdate.

The hapless driver is then told to apply for a learner's licence, learn to drive all over again (with all the rules that apply to learners, in the bargain) and then appear for a driving test after 30 days of holding the said learner's licence. Some people like these have been driving for more than 30 years now!

Hapless, really??!! They got the license under false pretences, by lying to their own government. If you lie in your passport application and get caught, your passport will be cancelled and possibly you may never be allowed to apply for a new one again. It is criminal fraud.
There's a reason why there are legal age limits in place- safety. Who takes responsibility if a 16-year old causes an accident and damage to life and property? The "hapless" parents will blame the "corrupt" RTO then, not realizing it is their indulgence that has brought on the catastrophe. Please don't waste your sympathy on such lawbreakers.

RTOs all over the country issued licences to people 16 years and older back in the late 1980s, when they gave declarations of driving with good intent signed by their parents. Now, these same people are being told that they can no longer drive!

Again- what is the source of this information? 16 was the lowered age ONLY for gearless scooters under 100cc, if I remember rightly. If indeed this was a policy followed by the Govt then surely there must be a process to regularize the licenses issued thus.

What our rule-bound lawmakers should have done was give the person a spot test and ascertain whether he can drive WELL (not fast / rashly) observing all the road rules and niceties of the road. If he does, renew his licence, without all the numerous trips required to RTOs, head-banging against walls, pillars and officials and associated activities that lay a heavier burden on an already over-burdened mind.

This is the process that they should legitimately follow to get a DL. spoilt brats who got it illegally when underage do not require any special consideration, in my opinion!

If RTO officers really passed applicants after ascertaining their knowledge of what good driving entails, I am sure that more than 90% of our drivers would never be allowed to unlock a car, let alone get onto the roads. Sad state, but true.

This is true but it has nothing to do with the issue at hand. RTO needs to clean up its act, and from what I hear, this has happened in some jurisdictions, which is a good thing. But that doesn't mean that any and all illegally issued licenses should automatically be legitimized.

[Maky]

Originally Posted by CLYDE

RTOs all over the country issued licences to people 16 years and older back in the late 1980s, when they gave declarations of driving with good intent signed by their parents. Now, these same people are being told that they can no longer drive!

I have one question Clyde:

- In bold, This was well within legality at the time? If so, Then this new rule makes no sense whatsoever.

Is the RTO trying to fill their coffers?
It's been a while since I got my license so I don't remember if I paid fees to the RTO as well or just the Driving School people. If there is indeed a separate fee that is paid to the RTO, which I suspect should be the case, then this could simple be their version of the Aadhar card ; ).

[CLYDE]

Dear Maky,

I don't know how the RTO is going back on its word now. Please read this webpage , especially Point 6 - (I suppose it is current)
http://rto.kar.nic.in/guide.htm
True, this is for a learner's licence, after one month of which a person would naturally apply for a permanent one - and get it!

Also look at the form downloaded from here which gives the declaration close to the end of page 2. This form is still in use!
http://www.karunadu.gov.in/e-forms/D...form2-CMV2.pdf

What I say is - when RTOs have renewed licences of under 18s time and again from their date of issue till now, it makes absolutely no sense to waste people's time and energy going through the rigmarole of a learner's licence, the 30-day wait and then the re-test. If they so desired to maintain the 'integrity' of their offices, they could have made people appear for a spot-test, ascertained their abilities and renewed / declined renewal of the license.