IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22835 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M.C.KOUSALYA, D/O.MADHAVAN, AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING IN HOUSE BEARING NUMBER III/198(1), KALPETTA NORTH, VYTHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTS, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KALPETTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT 673 122. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI HANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.22835/11 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF RESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE DT.22.7.11 ISSUED BY THE KALPETTA MUNICIPALITY TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF IDENTITY CARD ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA. EXT.P3: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED TO THE VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE VEHICLE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD RECEIVED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE dsn P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 22835 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner of an Autorickshaw which is covered by a contract carriage permit that is valid till 18.3.2012. As per the permit, the halting place for the petitioner’s vehicle is Muttil. The petitioner states that she has shifted her residence to Kalpetta and consequently it has become necessary for her to seek variation of the halting place stipulated in the permit. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though an application for variation of the permit was tendered, it was not received by the second respondent, that she was constrained to sent the original of Ext.P5 application dated 10.8.2011 for variation of the permit by registered post, that it was received by the second respondent on 11.8.2011, but till date orders have not been passed thereon. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the second respondent to take appropriate action on Ext.P5 application to vary Ext.P4 permit. 2. When the writ petition came up for hearing on 23.8.2011, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions. When the writ petition came up for further hearing today, Sri.Hanil Kumar, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted on instructions received from the second respondent that though the original of Ext.P5 application has been received by post, WPC No.22835/2011 2 the petitioner has not so far paid the prescribed fee and that on payment of the fee, the second respondent will consider Ext.P5 application and take an appropriate decision thereon within one month from the date of payment of the fee. In the light of the said submission, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction that in the event of the petitioner remitting the fee payable on Ext.P5 application within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and producing proof of such payment before the second respondent, the second respondent shall consider Ext.P5 application and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within one month from the date on which the receipt evidencing payment of fee and a certified copy of this judgment are produced before him. The second respondent shall after a decision is taken on the petitioner’s application communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps