IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2010 / 12TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 16683 of 2010(I) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. ANNAMMA JOY, OLIYIL HOUSE, VETTICKAL P.O., MULANTHURUTHY. 2. JOSE, PARAPPURAM HOUSE, KOOVAPPADY P.O., PERUMBAVOOR. 3. DEEPA BIJU, POTHENPILLY, KOOVAPPADY, PERUMBAVOOR. 4. BIJU GEORGE, POTHENPILLY, KOOVAPPADY, PERUMBAVOOR. BY ADVS. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL, SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 16683 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of goods carriage vehicles bearing Reg.Nos. KL-7-R/1956, KL4-F/2914, KL-AD/6947, KL- AB/7704 and KL8-B/7770. He has submitted applications for permission to alter the vehicles as Generator mounted vehicles as per Exts.P6 to P10. However, the permission sought for has not been granted by the respondent. According to the respondent, the alteration proposed is violative of Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988(the `Act' for short). Since no final orders have been passed on Exts.P6 to P10 till date, the petitioner seeks directions to consider his applications and to pass appropriate orders thereon. 2. The petitioner relies on Exts.P11 and P12 judgments by which this Court has held that fitting of a goods carriage vehicle with a generator set does not amount to alteration of the basic feature of the vehicle under Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Therefore, the petitioner claims a similar relief as in Exts.P11 and P12. Wpc 16683/2010 2 3. I have heard the learned Senior Government Pleader who appears for the respondents also. 4. In view of the fact that the petitioner is claiming a similar relief as in the judgments of this Court evidenced by Exts.P11 and P12, I do not see any ground to negative the claim of the petitioner. The petitioner's vehicles are goods carriage vehicles and therefore, there is no change in the classification also. 5. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to grant permission for alteration of the vehicles bearing Reg.Nos. KL-7-R/1956, KL4-F/2914, KL-AD/6947, KL-AB/7704 and KL8-B/7770 as Generator Vans, as sought for in the applications submitted by the petitioner evidenced herein by Exts.P6 to P10 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk