IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 786 of 2011(W) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- N. MUSHTAFA, SERINE MANZIL, VATAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.STALIN PETER DAVIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, VATAKARA - 673 101. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE - 673 020. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE - 673 020. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.786 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner purchased a goods vehicle bearing registration No.KL-13/B 4926 in an auction conducted by the Revenue Divisional Officer under the provisions of the Kerala Protection of River Banks and Removal of Sand Act, 2001. The sale by public auction was confirmed by Ext.P1 order dated 19.7.2010. The petitioner thereafter submitted Ext.P2 petition before the first respondent for transfer of ownership of the vehicle purchased by him in the public auction. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though several months have passed after Ext.P2 petition was filed, till date, orders have not been passed thereon. It is stated that though a copy of Ext.P3 order was produced before the first respondent to prove the fact that the petitioner is the owner of the vehicle, the first respondent is insisting on production of copies of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent to pass orders on Ext.P2 petition for transfer of ownership within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. When this writ petition came up for admission on W.P.(C) No.786 of 2011 2 28.1.2011, this Court passed the following order. “Admit. Issue urgent notice returnable in 10 days to the respondents. The third respondent shall on the petitioner producing a copy of this order furnish to him within three days a copy of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3. The petitioner shall upon receipt of the said documents, produce the same before the first respondent. The first respondent shall upon receipt of the said documents, consider Ext.P2 petition and pass orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within 10 days from the date of production of the documents, after following the procedure prescribed in rule 57 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules. Post after two weeks.” 3. When the writ petition came up for hearing today after service of notice, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though a copy of the interim order passed by this Court on 28.1.2011 was produced before the third respondent and the petitioner went over to his office on more than one occasion, till date, the third respondent has not furnished to him copies of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in such circumstances, he could not produce the said documents before the first respondent thereby disabling the W.P.(C) No.786 of 2011 3 first respondent from considering Ext.P2 petition and passing orders thereon. 4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submitted on instructions that the petitioner did not produce a copy of the interim order passed by this Court on 28.1.2011 before the third respondent and that was the reason why copies of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3 were not furnished to the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader made available to me for perusal copies of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3. The learned Government Pleader also offered to furnish copies thereof to the learned counsel for the petitioner today itself. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the writ petition itself can be disposed of with the following directions. 5. The petitioner shall upon receipt of the copies of the Government circular dated 5.1.2009 and the order of the District Collector dated 15.2.2010 referred to in Ext.P3 from the learned Government Pleader produce it before the first respondent who in turn shall act as directed by this Court in the order passed on 28.1.2011. W.P.(C) No.786 of 2011 4 The petitioner shall in order to enable the first respondent to act as directed above produce a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the interim order passed by this Court on 28.1.2011. The Registry is directed to issue a certified copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioner, if applied for, today itself. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.