High Court Kerala High Court

Vidya N Pai vs The State Transport Authority on 14 August, 2008

Kerala High Court
Vidya N Pai vs The State Transport Authority on 14 August, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 22759 of 2008(H)


1. VIDYA N PAI, AGED 33 YEARS, W/O.B.N.PAI,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, STATE TRANSPORT

3. THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/08/2008

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

           --------------------------------------------------------

                     W.P.(C) 22759 of 2008

           --------------------------------------------------------

                   Dated: AUGUST 14, 2008

                              JUDGMENT

The issue raised in this writ petition is regarding

the payment of compounding fee. Initially by order dated

27.3.2006 petitioner was required to pay the compounding

fee in two weeks. That was challenged before the Tribunal

in MVAA 454/2007. The appeal was disposed of by Ext.P1

judgment, directing that the compounding fee shall be paid

within two weeks of the date of the judgment. Petitioner

submits that the compounding fee was paid by him on

2.2.2008 and receipt of which has been acknowledged by

Ext.P2. However, the payment is not accepted as in

compliance of Ext.P1 for the reason that the payment was

not made within the time specified by the Tribunal in its

judgment. According to him, for that reason the permit is

also not renewed.

2. True, there was a default on the part of the

WP(C) 22759/08
2

petitioner in complying with the direction of the Tribunal.

But, then, having regard to the fact that he has complied

with the direction, though belatedly, I am inclined to direct

that the payment in terms of Ext.P2 be accepted as the

payment in compliance with Ext.P1. It is directed that on

this basis the request made by the petitioner shall be

considered by the 1st respondent and orders on his

application for renewal of permit will be passed.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE

mt/-