IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 21ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 2ND PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 531 of 2008(L) ------------------------ PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. RAJEEV.R, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O RAGHAVAN PILLAI, MATHINOOR PUTHENVEEDU, KERALAPURAM, VELLIMON P.O. 2. THE KERALA STATE PRIVATE BUS OPERATOR'S FEDERATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, LAWRENCE BABU, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM-1. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM. BY G.P.SRI.M.R.SABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 531/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- P1: True copy of the application for renewal of permit in From PRA dated 30-6-2007 P2: True copy of the NOC dated 29-6-2007 issued by Shriram Investments Limited. P3 True copy of the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 5-11-2007 P4: True copy of the application for replacement of vehicle in Form PVA dated 5-11-2007 P4: True copy of the application for replacement of vehicle in Form PVA dated 7-11-2007 P5: True copy of the communication issued by the 2nd respondent dated 29- 11-2007 P6: True copy of the judgment in WPC 10812/2007 dated 22-6-2007 Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 531 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Ext.P4 application made by the petitioner for replacement of the vehicle has been rejected by Ext.P5 for the reason that no objection certificate from the financier has not been produced. Ext.P5 is under challenge in this writ petition. 2. As rightly contended by the petitioners production of a no objection certificate from the financier is not a requirement for considering an application for replacement. This position has also been clarified by this Court in Ext.P6 judgment. 3. In view of this, I direct that Ext.P4 application shall be considered by the 1st respondent without insisting on no objection certificate from the financier. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Antony Dominic, Judge. mn.