IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35085 of 2010(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------------- SHRI IQBAL, S/O.KHADER, 36/679,KARIVELITHUNDIYIL HOUSE, PULLEPADY, KOCHI-36. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM-682 030. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.35085 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who is the owner of vehicle bearing No. KL 07/AP 6334. It is originally registered as a Goods Vehicle. Subsequently, the petitioner has submitted an application for alteration of vehicle as a generator van by mounting a generator. The said application was rejected as per Ext.P2 order dated 18.10.2010. As per Ext.P2 it was held that the vehicle fitted with equipments like rig, generator, compressor are Non Transport Vehicle and they cannot be used as a goods vehicle for carrying other goods. At the same time it was found that a vehicle carrying a generator set with engine having space for carrying other goods is a goods carriage as per Section 2(14) and hence, there is no need for alteration. Apparently, there is incongruity in the said assigned reasons. That apart, a scanning of Ext.P2 would reveal that the respondent has not virtually considered the application submitted by the petitioner in its true perspective. Evidently, the request of the petitioner was for altering the WPC.35085/2010 : 2 : vehicle as a generator van. The alteration in vehicle is subject to section 52 of Motor Vehicles Act. In short, alteration of vehicles in contravention of section 52 of the Act is impermissible. At the same time, going by the explanation to section 52 of the Act means a change in the structure of the vehicle which results in a change in the basic feature of the vehicle. The question whether mounting of generator would alter the basic feature of the vehicle was considered by this Court in a number of writ petitions. Considering the fact that mounting a generator of a vehicle would not change structure of a vehicle resulting in a change in its basic feature it was held that it would not in any way violate section 52 of Motor Vehicles Act. Mounting a generator also will not amount change of classification. On such consideration, this Court directed the concerned authority to grant permission to alter the vehicle as generator van in WP(C)No.32761/2010 and WP (C) No.3108/2010. In view of the said position, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of as hereunder: Ext.P2 request made by the petitioner was not properly considered, and, that apart, in the light of the aforementioned WPC.35085/2010 : 3 : judgments it is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, Ext.P2 is set aside. Consequently, there will be a direction to the respondent to grant permission to the petitioner for alteration of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-07/ AP 6334 as generator van, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that in case, at a later point of time, it is found that the classification of the vehicle has been changed, it will be open to the respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Sd/- (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge