IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 31093 of 2010(J)
1. MOHAMMEDKUTTY T.P., S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.I.DINESH MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :20/10/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No. 31093 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is the Managing Director of Westar
Classic. The firm operates a stage carriage service on the
route Perinthalmanna – Ottapalam with stage carriage bearing
registration No. KL-9G 2455. Subsequently, the firm
purchased later, model vehicle bearing registration No. KL-53
B 5207. Though the permit of the existing vehicle viz., KL-
9G 2455 stands in the name of the Managing Partner,
Westar Classic, Pulamanthole, Perinthalmanna, the latter
model vehicle bearing registration No. KL-53 B 5207 was
registered in the name of Muhammedkutty T.P., S/o.
Moideenkutty, Managing Partner, Westar Classic,
Pulamanthole P.O., Perinthalmanna, Malappuram-678 323.
The petitioner herein has preferred Ext.P5 application for
replacement of the vehicle. The grievance of the petitioner is
that the respondent has taken a stand that the application for
replacement of vehicle would not be considered on account of
the fact that the existing vehicle stands in the name of the
WPC.NO.31093/2010
: 2 :
Managing Partner whereas the incoming vehicle stands in the
name of Muhammedkutty. The contention of the petitioner is
that Ext.P1 Partner ship deed would reveal that the petitioner
is the Managing Partner of the firm and therefore, according
to the petitioner the said reason shall not stand in the way of
consideration of the application for replacement of the vehicle.
2. Be that as it may, it is the fact that the petitioner has
already submitted Ext.P5 application for replacement of the
vehicle before the respondent. If any further details for the
purpose of taking a decision on Ext.P5 including consent letter
from other partners are required it will be open to the
respondent to call for such details from the petitioner and to
provide time fore the petitioner to produce such documents.
At any rate, the respondent is bound to pass orders on Ext.P5
application. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of
directing the respondent to consider Ext.P5 application and
pass orders thereon, expeditiously, at any rate, within a period
of one month from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.
Sd/-
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
jma //true copy//
P.A to Judge