IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 W.P(C).No. 17313 of 2008(J) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- K.V. RAVI, S/O. CHOYI, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOOTTAPUNE, P.O. MYLATTY, UDUMA. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KASARAGOD. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SMT. DEEPA. K.R THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 17313 OF 2008-J ==================== Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is the permit issued to the petitioner for the route mentioned therein in respect of a light motor stage carriage. As the period of Ext.P1 has expired, petitioner has applied for renewal of the permit. According to the petitioner, demanding replacement of the light motor vehicle stage carriage with a later medium motor vehicle stage carriage, 1st respondent is declining to consider his application for renewal of the permit. It is on this averment, the writ petition has been filed. 2. The issue regarding the insistence for replacement of light motor vehicle stage carriage with medium motor vehicle stage carriage has been considered by this court in several cases. A Division Bench, dealing with an issue of this nature, in its judgment in WA No.2056/03 directed the State Government to consider this issue and pass appropriate orders applicable throughout the State. It was also directed that the respective RTA's shall keep in abeyance orders insisting on replacement of vehicles until a decision is taken by the Government as directed. It is submitted that even now orders have not been passed by the Government following WPC 17313/08 :2 : the Division Bench. Taking into account the factual position as above, this writ petition is also disposed of directing that if replacement of the light motor vehicle stage carriage of the petitioner with a later medium motor vehicle stage carriage is the reason for not passing orders on the application for renewal of the permit, the respondents shall not insist on such replacement until the Government passes orders as directed by the Division Bench in the judgment referred to above. However, it is clarified that once Government passes orders as directed by the Division Bench, the petitioner will be permitted to operate thereafter only in terms of such order. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp