IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 8TH JUNE 2010 / 18TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17614 of 2010(B) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- P.N.SANKARAN, POYILIL HOUSE KAIPARAMBA PO, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY VADAKARA. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY VADAKARA. R1 &R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.S.MUHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 17614 OF 2010 B ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th June, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a stage carriage bearing registration No: KL-8 AQ 5373 covered by a regular permit conducting services on the route Thrissur-Kozhikode-Kayakkodi. The service was being operated as a limited stop ordinary service (LSOS for short). According to the petitioner, his route length being 190 kms the service can be operated only as a super fast service. He has already submitted an application for the renewal of his permit and concurrence of the sister authorities have also been obtained. However, the petitioner's application is for renewal as a limited stop ordinary service. Since the petitioner requires renewal as a super fast service, he has submitted Ext.P5 request for treating his application as one for renewal as a super fast service. The petitioner apprehends that his request Ext.P5 may not be considered by the authorities. Therefore, he seeks appropriate directions for the consideration of his request Ext.P5 also while considering his application for renewal. I have heard the learned senior Govt. Pleader also. WPC 17614/2010 2 2. Since it is submitted that no orders have been passed on the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner there is no reason why Ext.P5 request should also not be considered while considering the application for renewal of permit submitted by the petitioner. It is submitted that the next meeting of the RTA is scheduled to be held on 25/6/2010. 3. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P5 also along with his application for the renewal of permit in respect of his vehicle bearing registration No: KL-8 AQ 5373, at the meeting of the RTA scheduled to be conducted on 25/6/2010 and to pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 17614/2010 3