IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2009 / 8TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 11293 of 2008(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- JOSEPH RODRIGUES @ JUNO RODRIGUES, S/O. RODRIGUES, AGED 28 YEARS, 34/1347, JOSE COTTAGE, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. BY ADV. MR.S.NIRMAL KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. M.A. ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/01/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.11293/2008-T: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE FIR DTD. 14/01/1999. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE DTD. 05/02/2003. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD. EXT.P.4. SERIES: RELEVANT PAGES OF RC BOOK OF VEHICLE NO. KL-7 Q 1674 OWNED BY PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED ON 14/02/2008 BY PETITIONER BEFORE R.3. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER OF R.3. DTD. 06/03/2008. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.11293 OF 2008 (T) ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is an invalid person. He wants to alter his car bearing registration No.KL-7Q-1674 into an invalid carriage. He submitted Exhibit P5 application for sanctioning the alteration. That was rejected by Exhibit P6 order passed by the third respondent. 2. A reading of Exhibit P6 shows that the reason for rejecting the alteration is that it requires requires change of break, Gear and clutch system installed by the manufacturer of the vehicle. In my view, in several cases of this nature, writ petitions have been allowed by permitting such alteration, taking the view that for such alteration Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is not offended. W.P.(C) No.11293 of 2008 - 2 - 3. Therefore, Exhibit P6 is quashed. The third respondent is directed to consider Exhibit P5 application and pass appropriate orders. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four weeks on production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE skr