IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20667 of 2010(G)
1. SMT.NOORJAHAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :12/10/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No. 20667 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 12th day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is a widow of one Sri. N. Abdul
Jabbar, who was the registered owner of a stage carriage
bearing registration No. KL-11/K-6696. The said vehicle is
covered with a regular permit. On the death of Sri.N. Abdul
Jabbar, the petitioner has submitted Exts.P3 and P4
applications respectively for transfer of permit and for
transfer of ownership of the vehicle. Ext.P1 is the death
certificate of the said Sri.N.Abdul Jabbar. Ext.P2 is the
certificate issued by the concerned village officer showing the
relationship of the petitioner with the deceased. Exts.P5 to P7
are the No Objection Certificates issued by the children of the
deceased expressing their consent for transfer of permit and
ownership in the name of the petitioner. The grievance of the
petitioner is that despite the receipt of the said documents no
action has so far been taken to effect the transfer of ownership
as also the transfer of permit, in respect of the aforesaid
vehicle, in the name of the petitioner. It is further contended
WPC.20667/2010
: 2 :
that the respondents are insisting the petitioner for production
of legal heirship certificate. Based on Ext.P8 judgment of this
Court in WP(C)No. 16409/2010, it is contended that production
of legal heirship certificate is not mandatory for the purpose of
deciding transfer of ownership and permit. In short, when
other documents showing relationship are available, there is no
need to insist for production of legal heirship certificate.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as
also the learned Government Pleader.
3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that
though an application for temporary permit has been received,
the respondents have not yet received a proper application for
transfer of ownership and permit from the petitioner. That
apart, it is submitted that on 9.7.2010 a hearing was scheduled.
However, the petitioner and other legal heirs did not attend the
same.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
case, the respondents fix any date for appearance of the
petitioner as also the other legal heirs, they would appear
before the said authority. It is prayed that the respondents may
be directed not to insist for production of legal heirship
certificate as a condition for consideration of the applications.
WPC.20667/2010
: 3 :
In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of on the
following lines:-
It will be open to the petitioner to make proper
applications for transfer of permit and transfer of ownership in
respect of the aforesaid vehicle. On receipt of such application
the respondents shall fix a date for hearing the petitioner and
the other legal heirs and the respondents shall not insist for
production of legal heirship certificate for consideration of the
applications for transfer of permit and ownership in case, the
petitioner produces such other documents proving her
entitlement to claim transfer of permit and ownership of the
vehicle and appropriate application for transfer of permit and
ownership. The second respondent shall consider the request
of the petitioner for transfer of ownership and permit in
accordance with law expeditiously, at any rate, within a period
of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment provided the petitioner satisfies the above conditions.
Sd/-
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
jma //true copy//
P.A to Judge