IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 14580 of 2010(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- N.ABDUL RASHEED, S/O. ALAVI, NEELANGATH HOUSE, P O EDARIKKODE, MALAPPURAM-676 501. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 14580 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, along with one Sri.A.Sreejith, has filed an application for transfer of his permit on 11.11.2009. Sri.A.Sreejith was conducting services on the route Seethamount-Thrissur via Kozhikode on the strength of a regular permit with vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/N 9329. The permit was valid upto 19.2.2005. The permit holder has already applied for renewal of the permit. However, the renewal has not yet been granted for the reason that being an inter- district route, concurrence of the sister authorities have to be obtained. During the pendency of the application for renewal of his regular permit, Sri.A.Sreejith has agreed to transfer the permit to the petitioner and has submitted a joint application for transfer, as stated above. The petitioner has also submitted an application for the issue of a temporary permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Since there was delay in disposal of the application, the petitioner and Sri.A.Sreejith had approached this court by filing WP(C) Wpc 14580/2010 2 No.5045 of 2010. The said writ petition was disposed of as per Ext.P1 judgment. In Ext.P1 judgment, the following direction has been issued. “Pending decision on the application for renewal of the regular permit, the first respondent has also submitted an application for the issue of a temporary permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act on which also no orders have been passed. Therefore, there shall be a further direction to the second respondent to issue the temporary permit within a period of two weeks”. Thereafter, the petitioner's application was considered by the respondent and was rejected as per Ext.P4. 2. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the rejection of his application for temporary permit is in violation of the positive direction contained in Ext.P1 judgment. As noticed above, this court has directed the respondent to issue temporary permit within a period of three weeks. In spite of the above, Ext.P4 has been issued rejecting the petitioner's application, without any justification. 3. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and Wpc 14580/2010 3 Ext.P4 is set aside. The respondent is directed to issue the temporary permit to the petitioner in compliance with the directions contained in the judgment of this court, evidenced by Ext.P1, forthwith. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk