IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14613 of 2009(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- NAVEEN KUMAR, S/O. JATHAPPA GOWDA, HOUSE NO. 6/145, BELLUR PANCHAYATH, KAKKEBETTU HOUSE, BELLOOR P.O., MULLERIYA, KASARGOD. BY ADVS. MR.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARGOD REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARGOD BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.14613 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th May,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner, a registered owner of a Light Motor Vehicle, was operating the said vehicle on the route Bengapedaru - Kasargod on the strength of Ext.P1 permit, which expired on 20.5.2009. Petitioner sought for renewal of the permit and thereupon, a notice was issued by the first respondent requiring the petitioner to replace the existing Light Motor Vehicle with a Heavy/Medium Motor Vehicle. Petitioner had in the meanwhile, sought for grant of temporary permit pending renewal of the regular permit. The stand similar to the one taken by the second respondent, requiring replacement of Light Motor Vehicles with Heavy/Medium Motor vehicles was earlier considered by a Bench of this Court in W.A.2056/2003. This Court held that it is for the Government to decide the question, as evidenced by Ext.P4 judgment. But the Government has not taken a final decision pursuant to Ext.P4. In the meanwhile, this W.P ( C) No.14613 of 2009 2 Court has on several occasions, directed renewal of existing permits granted in relation to Light Motor Vehicles without insisting upon a replacement of the same. 2. The issue is therefore, covered in favour of the petitioner as per Ext.P4 judgment as also other judgments. 3. In the result, after hearing counsel on both sides, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the application for renewal of Ext.P1 permit without insisting on the petitioner replacing the Light Motor Vehicle with the Heavy/Medium Motor vehicle. The application for renewal should be dealt with, without reference to the above condition. If the permit is renewed, it shall also be made clear that the petitioner will be bound by the decision that the Government takes pursuant to the direction issued in W.A.2056/2003. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.14613 of 2009 3 (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.14613 of 2009 4