IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 4891 of 2011(J) ------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- P.VIJAYAN, S/O. RAMMUNNI NAIR, MALAYATTIL HOUSE, MANHANNIYAM P.O. PEPRAMBRA. BY ADVS. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VATAKARA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-673101. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VATAKARA, PIN - 673101. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 4891/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 17/07/2007. P2: COPYC OF THE REPLACEMENT APPLICATION DATED 10/02/2010. P3: COPY OF THE CHELLAN RECEIPT DATED 10/02/2010. P4: COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 25/01/2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NI /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 4891 OF 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage service on the route Kozhikkode – Atholi – Ulliyeri - Kuttiadi on the strength of a regular permit, which is valid till 27.11.2012. The petitioner is presently operating service with stage carriage bearing registration No.KL 11-L 3339. After the petitioner purchased a later model vehicle (KL 8-AM 2599), he submitted Ext.P2 application for permission to replace the existing vehicle. The requisite fee was also paid. Since the outgoing vehicle has already been disposed of, the petitioner is operating the stage carriage service on the strength of temporary permits issued in respect of the later model vehicle from time to time. This writ petition is filed contending that though more than one year has passed after Ext.P2 application was submitted, till date, orders have not been passed thereon. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to take a final decision on Ext.P2 application within a W.P.(C)No. 4891 OF 2011 2 time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. The respondents have been served and they have entered appearance through the learned Government Pleader, who on instructions submitted that in respect of the outgoing vehicle, check reports have been issued, that the petitioner has not so far compounded the offences noticed in the check reports and unless the compounding fee is paid, the petitioner is not entitled to have the vehicle re-placed. 3. It is evident from the submissions made at the Bar that it is in view of check reports issued in respect of the outgoing vehicle that the respondents have delayed consideration of Ext.P2 application. A learned single Judge of this Court has in W.P(C)No.24496 of 2005 held that the Regional Transport Authority cannot decline to accept the motor vehicle tax or issue fitness certificate or renew the permits for non- payment of compounding fee in respect of offences noticed in the check report and that armtwisting tactics cannot be resorted to decline the fitness certificate or renewal of permit. A learned single Judge of this Court has in Calicut Wayanad Motor Service (P) Ltd v. State of Kerala 1986 KLT 1216 held that W.P.(C)No. 4891 OF 2011 3 when the mode of recovery is indicated in the Central Excise Act, the authorities under the Motor Vehicles Act cannot widen the mode of recovery or provide other channels of recovery. It was held that statutory functionaries cannot by pursuation or pressure make any other statutory functionary to do an act which the statute under which it functions does not authorise. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, I am of the opinion that the stand taken by the respondents cannot be sustained. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with direction to respondents to take a final decision on Ext.P2 application expeditiously, and in any event, within one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the second respondent. Till such time, the respondents shall periodically issue temporary permits to the petitioner so as to enable him to operate the service. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE dmb