IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 10TH JULY 2009 / 19TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 9549 of 2009(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT. T.M. CHANDRI, THAZHA MOTTAMMAL HOUSE, P.O. MUTTUNGAL WEST, VADAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHROITY, VADAKARA. 3. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA. BY ADV. SRI. M.A. ASIF, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX Petitioners Exhibits: Ext.P1: True copy of the permit issued to the petitioner Ext.P2: True copy of the time schedule issued to the petitioner Ext.P3: True copy of the proceedings dated 5.8.2008 Ext.P4: True copy of the appeal memorandum in MVAA No.614/08 Ext.P5: True copy of the MVI Report Ext.P6: True copy of the judgment in WA No.152/1992 dated 6.3.1992 Ext.P7: True copy of the judgment in MVAA No.614.2008 dated 5.2.2009 /True copy/ P.A. To Judge V.GIRI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (C) No. 9549 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is the registered owner of a stage carriage bearing Reg.No.KL 11 Q 1230 on the route Vadakara-Mukkali, applied for variation in the conditions of the permit on three counts. One is to extend the route from Vadakara To Thanneerpanthal, second is reduction of round trip from Vadakara to Mukkali and the third one is change of halting place from Mukkali to Thanneerpanthal. This was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority under Ext.P3 by a cryptic order, which reads as follows: “Heard halting place is changed from Mukkali to Thanneerpanthal which is against rule 80(3) of KMV rules. Hence rejected.” 2. Petitioner preferred an appeal before the STAT. The appeal has also been rejected under Ext.P7 Order, which is under challenge in this writ petition. 3. In so far as Ext.P3 is concerned the reason stated to reject the application that the change of halting place from WPC. No. 9549 OF 2009 : 2 : Mukkali to Thanneerpanthal is in contravention of Sec. 80(3) of the Motor Vehicle Act, does not seem to be sustainable. A change of termini is what is prohibited. The other aspects have not been considered. 4. In so far as Ext.P7 Order of the Tribunal is concerned, the only reason shown for affirming the order passed by the RTA is that the extended route is a well served sector. Other aspects have not been considered. 5. I am satisfied that the matter requires reconsideration by the RTA. Accordingly Exts. P3 and P7 are set aside. The second respondent shall pass fresh orders on the petitioner’s application for variation of the conditions of the permit in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) jma