IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2011 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 9812 of 2011(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.T.ABDUL GAFOOR KHAN, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED ALI, PARATHODI HOUSE, ANAKAYAM P.O., MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.9812 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage on the route Padaparamba – Manjeri on the strength of a regular permit. It was initially issued on 13.6.2001 and was later extended for a period of 5 years till 12.6.2006. Thereafter the permit was renewed and it is valid upto 12.6.2011. Since the petitioner was running the service using a 4 wheeler stage carriage at the time of renewal, it was stipulated that he should replace the vehicle with a 6 wheeler stage carriage as and when Government takes a decision in that regard. Such a direction was issued in view of the directions issued by this Court in W.A.No.2056 of 2003 and connected cases, wherein this Court had directed the Government to consider the entire matter. It is not in dispute that the Government are yet to take a decision in the matter. This writ petition is filed contending that as the Government have not taken a decision in the matter so far, the respondents are not likely to pass orders on Ext.P4 application for the renewal of the permit. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to take up Ext.P4 and pass orders thereon, without insisting on replacement of the existing 4 wheeler stage carriage with a 6 wheeler stage carriage. Reliance is also placed W.P.(C) No.9812 of 2011 2 on the unreported decisions of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.21627 of 2007 and 25474 of 2008, copies of which are produced as Exts.P2 and P3, in support of the said contention. 2. Heard learned counsel on both sides. Ext.P1 discloses that the petitioner is presently holding a stage carriage permit to operate a stage carriage on the route Padaparamba – Manjeri. The said permit will cease to be in force on 12.6.2011. Ext.P1 also discloses that the petitioner has been directed to replace the existing stage carriage with a 6 wheeler stage carriage. It is not in dispute that the Government are yet to take a final decision in the matter. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the respondents should consider the application for renewal of the regular permit and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously without insisting on the replacement of the existing vehicle with a 6 wheeler stage carriage. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the competent authority among the respondents to consider Ext.P4 application for renewal of the regular stage carriage permit and pass orders thereon expeditiously and in any event on or before 1.6.2011 without insisting on the petitioner replacing the existing stage carriage with a 6 wheeler stage carriage vehicle. Upon the permit being W.P.(C) No.9812 of 2011 3 renewed, necessary endorsements shall be made on the original of the permit immediately thereafter so as to enable the petitioner to operate the stage carriage even after 12.6.2011. Needless to say, such renewal will be subject to the decision to be taken by the Government pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in W.A.No.2056 of 2003 and connected cases. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.