IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 2ND ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29507 of 2010(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT. SHIBINA, W/O.SAROSH, PAVITHRAM, THALASSERY, THIRUVANGAD POST KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SANTHOSH JOSE SMT.DIVYA B.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,KANNUR. 2. THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,KANNUR. 3. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.29507 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner, who is the owner of light motor vehicle bearing registration No.KL.13-M 4789, Mahindra Bolero is against the refusal on the part of the third respondent to accept Ext.P3 application for re-classification of the said vehicle. There cannot be any doubt that the third respondent is the authority competent to entertain the application for re-classification of the vehicle. He would be able to decide the question whether the petitioner's request for re-classification is maintainable only after receiving the same. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to accept Ext.P3 application in case the petitioner re-submits it and pass orders thereon, in accordance with law, expeditiously. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO. 2 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO. 3