Kerala High Court
WP(C)/41972/2017 of BABY PAUL Vs SECRETARY on 29 December 2017
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 41972 of 2017 (V) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) : --------------------------- BABY PAUL, PANATTU HOUSE, ASAMANNOOR P.O.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 41972 of 2017 (V)
------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S) :
---------------------------
BABY PAUL, PANATTU HOUSE, ASAMANNOOR P.O., PERUMBAVOOR.
BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON
RESPONDENT(S) :
-----------------------------
THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI - 685 603.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.A.C.VIDHYA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ON 29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
Msd.
----------------------------------------- APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE VEHICLE KL-40 M 2050.
EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.1837/2017 DATED 15.02.2017.DATED 15.02.2017.
EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE.
EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.38809/2017 DATED 04.12.2017.DATED 04.12.2017.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
Devan Ramachandran, J.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
W.P.(C) No.41972 of 2017
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The petitioner is said to be the holder of a regularpermit on the route Nedumkandam-Pathanamthitta withrespect to a stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-40M 2050. According to the petitioner the basic permit of thevehicle expired on 25.6.2012 and that the application forrenewal is still pending and not yet processed. Accordingto him, his permit was for a Super Class service (FastPassenger Service) and that by virtue of the amendmentbrought into the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules as well asScheme of Nationalisation, the said permit could not berenewed as a super class service. He says that thereforehe was operating on the basis of a temporary permit.According to him, he now wants to continue the operationon the basis of temporary permit and wants to clear out hisvehicle by procuring a clearance with respect to that W.P(C).41972/17 :2:
vehicle till the renewal is granted. The grievance of thepetitioner appears to be that the respondent is refusing todo so; but is insisting that a permit-less certificate isprocured with respect to the vehicle by the petitioner.According to the petitioner this Court has in several casesalready held that when clearance certificates are appliedfor, permit-less certificates are not necessary since theapplication for renewal was pending with respect to thevehicle for which clearance is sought for. The petitioner hascited Exts.P3 and P5 judgments issued by two other learnedJudges of this Court in support of his assertion.
2. I have considered Exts.P3 and P5 judgments and Isee that in Ext.P3 judgment a learned Judge has found thatthe question whether the petitioner is entitled to proceedwith an application for renewal, without there being avehicle, is a matter for the Regional Transport Authorityconcerned to consider at the relevant point of time. Onsuch reasoning, the learned Judge had allowed thepetitioner in that case to sell his vehicle without a permit-less certificate.
W.P(C).41972/17 :3:
3. I am in respectful affirmation of the conclusions andholdings in Exts.P3 and P5 judgments and see no reason todiffer from the view taken therein.
4. In such circumstances, the respondent is directed totake up Ext.P4 application preferred by the petitioner and toconsider the same and pass appropriate orders on it inaccordance with law, taking note of Exts.P3 and P5 judgmentsproduced in this writ petition. Appropriate orders shall beissued in terms of this judgment by the respondent asexpeditiously as possible, not later than a period of one monthfrom the date of production of a copy of the judgment. Tofacilitate early disposal of the application the petitioner is atliberty to produce a certified copy of the judgment along witha copy of this writ petition before the respondent and the timeframes granted in this judgment will begin on the day onwhich the petitioner so produces it before the respondent.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-Devan Ramachandran,Judge