IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 28TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27369 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------- 1. NELSON PEREIRA, S/O.LATE DM.PEREIRA FERROR COLONY, VALENCIA, MANGALORE 2. SMT.E.PEREIRA,, W/O.NELSON PEREIRA, FERROR COLONY, VALENCIA, MANGALORE. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, TRIVANDRUM 2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY TRIVANDRUM. BY GP SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).27369/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 19th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT First petitioner is a registered owner of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KA 19/AC 5001 which is stated to be covered with a regular interstate permit on the route Kasargode-Mangalore, and second petitioner is the registered owner of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KA 19/B 9001 with an interstate permit on the route Mangalore-Kazargode. According to the petitioners, interstate permit is being issued subject to the payment of tax to the Government of Karnataka as well as the Government of Kerala. But the permits are not included in the interstate agreement in question when they had come up for renewal. Petitioners submit that if the permits are included in the interstate agreement between the State of Karnataka and State of Kerala, then hey would be in a position to continue to operate the vehicle on the interstate permit. A similar matter has been considered by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment. W.P.(C).27369/2008 2 Representations filed by the petitioners before the Government as Exts.P2 and P3 are pending consideration. 2. I heard learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Exts.P2 and P3 and take a decision thereon as expeditiously as possible. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs