IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6884 of 2010(I) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- N.M.NISSAR , NADUVILAPARAMBIL, MANJALI, MANNAM PO,N.PARUR BY ADVS.MR.K.R.KURUP MR.C.R.SYAMKUMAR MR.K.J.ABRAHAM MR.LAVARAJ M.G. MR.C.R.VINOD KUMAR MR.JOSE KURIAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- THE ADDL.REGISTERING AUTHORITY, (JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER) SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,N.PARUR SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.6884 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of a goods carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-7/U 4316. After purchase of the vehicle, he converted the same into a closed type vehicle for the purpose of transporting meat and meat products. Since the transportation of meat and meat products was not found to be profitable, he has decided to convert the vehicle into an open body type vehicle, so that the same can be used for transportation of various other materials. The alteration does not change the basic feature of the vehicle and therefore he sought permission for the same. However, his request has not been considered by the authority. Therefore, he has approached this Court by filing this Writ Petition. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent. It is stated in the counter affidavit that on examination of the vehicle on 5.2.2010, it was found that the length of the chassis had been extended by 75 cms. by welding additional metal pieces to the rear end of the body. Since the above alteration was not permissible, it is wpc No.6884/2010 2 submitted that the required permission was not granted. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the extension that was noticed at the time of inspection on 5.10.2010 has subsequently been removed and the length of the chassis has been restored to its original condition. Therefore, according to the petitioner, at present there is no impediment to the grant of the alteration that is sought for. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that the vehicle would have to be produced for fresh inspection in the light of the above statement. However, he has no objection to the request of the petitioner being considered by the respondent in accordance with law. 4. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the request of the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P3 in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/