IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2011 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 8372 of 2011(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.JAYARAMA, S/O.SANJEEVA RAO, KORAKKODE, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD - 671121. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.M.A.ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.8372 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-13/B 6507 on the route Kasargod – Adoor – Athnadikadavu on the strength of Ext.P1 regular permit. With a view to replace the said vehicle with a later model vehicle bearing registration No.KL-13/J 9560 , the petitioner has filed Ext.P4 application dated 1.3.2011 before the respondent. It is stated that the out going vehicle is a 1995 model vehicle and cannot therefore be used as a stage carriage. The petitioner submits that in such circumstances unless expeditious orders are passed on Ext.P4 petition for replacement of the vehicle with a later model vehicle, he will be disabled from operating the stage carriage service. Further, it is stated that the validity of the permit will also expire on 20.6.2011 and unless the replacement is ordered before the expiry of the permit, the petitioner will not be in a position to seek renewal of the permit. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to pass expeditious orders on Ext.P4. 2. The pleadings and the materials on record disclose that the petitioner is an existing stage carriage operator operating a service on the route Kasargod – Adoor – Athnadikadavu from June 2006 W.P.(C) No.8372 of 2011 2 onwards. What the petitioner seeks in Ext.P4 is permission to replace the existing vehicle with a later model vehicle. The seating capacity of both the vehicles is also same. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the respondent should consider Ext.P4 application and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 application for replacement of the vehicle expeditiously and in any event within three weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment before him. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.