IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21959 of 2010(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ REMANI AMMA, PUTHIYAVEEDU, KURA P.O., KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21959 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage carriage operator conducting services on an inter regional route Seethathode- Ernakulam with stage carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL- 02/X 3133. The petitioner's service traverses the districts of Ernakulam, Kottayam and Pathanamthitta. She was operating her services on the strength of a regular permit as a Limited Stop Ordinary Service (LSOS). The validity of the regular permit was only up to 25.7.2009. Therefore, on 7.7.2009, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P1 application for the renewal of her permit. According to the petitioner, the regular permit was originally in the name of Mr.P.D.Thomas who himself has submitted the renewal application. However, the permit was later on transferred to the name of the petitioner. 2. Since the petitioner's route is an inter regional route, concurrences had to be obtained from the sister authorities before her renewal could be granted. Accordingly, the concurrences have been obtained, as evidenced by Exts.P2 and P2(a). Therefore, the petitioner's application is ripe for consideration. However, wpc No.21959/2010 2 since the route length of the petitioner is 162 kms., as per the rules, the permit cannot be renewed as an LSOS. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation for conversion of her service as a Super Fast Service. Since concurrences of the sister authorities have already been obtained, the petitioner contends that no further concurrence is necessary. She, therefore, seeks appropriate directions for the consideration of her renewal application along with Ext.P4, expeditiously. The learned Senior Government Pleader has no objection to such a direction being issued. 3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P4 request in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The respondent shall also take note of Ext.P3 judgment of this Court. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/