IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WA.No. 441 of 2011 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.4630/2011 Dated 18/03/2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------- BASHEER,44/1651A,CHACKALAPARAMBU HOUSE, KOCHI,ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM,PIN 682 030. BY SENIOR GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.BENNY GERVACIS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA.No. 441 of 2011 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE 1 : TRUE OCPY OF THE NOTIFICATION VIDE NO.SO.1248(E) DATED 05.11.2004 ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAY. ANNEXURE 2 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.22376OF 2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 06.01.2011. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE J.Chelameswar, C.J. & Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 441 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. Aggrieved by judgment dated 18.03.2011 in W.P.(C) No.4630 of 2011, a partially successful petitioner preferred the instant appeal in so far as the judgment went against him. 2. The appellant is the owner of a goods vehicle bearing registration No.KBR-1046. It appears that the vehicle is fitted with a generator. Therefore, the appellant made an application, Ext.P2, to the respondent to classify the said vehicle as 'non-transport vehicle' and endorse the alteration in the RC book as a generator mounted vehicle. Complaining that no appropriate order is passed on such an application, the appellant herein approached this Court by the abovementioned writ petition seeking two reliefs. 3. By the judgment under appeal, a learned Judge of this Court partially allowed the writ petition allowing the first prayer of the appellant, i.e., the vehicle is to be described as a WA No. 441 of 2011 -:2:- generator mounted vehicle. The learned Judge held that in a number of writ petitions earlier this Court had granted such directions on an appropriate consideration of relevant statutory provisions. Coming to the second prayer the learned Judge declined to grant the relief. Hence the appeal. 4. The learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.Sajeev Kumar K. Gopal, brought to our notice a notification issued by the Government of India on 25.11.2004, whereunder “vehicles or trailers fitted with equipments like Rig, generator, compressor” are declared to be non-transport vehicles. Such a notification came to be issued in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section(4) of Section 41 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 which reads as follows: “41.Registration, how to be made:- (4) In addition to the other particulars required to be included in the certificate of registration, it shall also specify the type of the motor vehicle, being a type as the Central Government may, having regard to the design, construction and use of the motor vehicle, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify.” Obviously, the abovementioned notification was not WA No. 441 of 2011 -:3:- brought to the notice of the learned Judge. In the circumstances, we deem it appropriate to allow the appeal directing the respondent to consider the application of the appellant herein, i.e. Ext.P2, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. Antony Dominic, Judge. ttb