IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 15834 of 2010(D)
1. THE SECRETARY, QUILON AUTOMOBILE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPOPRT AUTHORITY,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY, R.T.A.,PATHANAMTHITTA.
For Petitioner :SRI.I.DINESH MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :25/05/2010
O R D E R
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.15834 OF 2010
------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of May, 2010
J U D G M E N T
~~~~~~~~~~~
The petitioner is a Co-operative Society of employees as
well as the registered owner of a stage carriage bearing
Registration No.SC KL-3 M 1733. The petitioner has been
conducting services on the route Pathanamthitta- Chavara with
the vacant timings of another vehicle bearing Registration
No.KL-3 F 5525. The existing temporary permit of the
petitioner is valid till 28.5.2010. The regular permit of the
operator in whose vacant timings he is operating has expired on
27.5.2010. It is contended that he was not operating during the
currency of the regular permit also. The petitioner has
therefore submitted an application for the issue of a regular
permit on the route. He has also applied for the issue of a
temporary permit for conducting services during the pendency
of his application for the issue of a regular permit. However, his
applications were rejected by the authority. Therefore, the
petitioner challenged the proceedings by filing
M.V.A.A.No.452/2009 before the State Transport Appellate
W.P.(C) No.15834/2010 2
Tribunal (‘STAT’ for short). The basic permit holder who got
impleaded in the said appeal put forward a claim for temporary
permit. However, his claim was rejected by the STAT.
Meanwhile, the application of the basic permit holder for
renewal of his permit was rejected by the authority. It is
submitted by the petitioner that the stage carriage bearing
Registration No.KL-3F 5525 in respect of which the basic permit
holder had sought renewal of his regular permit is now
conducting services on another route, Pathanamthitta-
Karunagappilly.
2. In the above circumstances, it is submitted that the
petitioner is entitled to the re-issue of his regular permit.
However, the petitioner complains that no orders have been
passed on his application for the said purpose, till date. The
learned senior Government Pleader has no objection in
directions being issued for the consideration of Ext.P4
application submitted by the petitioner.
3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is
W.P.(C) No.15834/2010 3
disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider the request
of the petitioner for the re-issue of his temporary permit,
evidenced herein by Ext.P4, in accordance with law and to pass
appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)
ps