IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24796 of 2010(Y) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MARGLY RAPHEL, W/O.RAPHEL, THANNAPPILLY HOUSE, EDAVANAKKAD P.O., VYPIN, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-682 030. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM/ REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 030. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVT. PLEADER MR.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.24796 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010 JUDGMENT The late husband of the petitioner was the owner and the permit holder of Stage Carriage vehicle bearing registration No.KL-42/C 3140, conducting services on the route Ernakulam High Court Junction - Ezhikkara. The permit holder died suddenly leaving behind the petitioner, who is his wife and two minor children. The petitioner has intimated the authorities that she is the person in possession of the vehicle. She has also intimated the authorities of her intention to operate the vehicle on the said route and to conduct service in the place of the deceased permit holder. She has submitted the necessary applications for transfer of the permit from the name of her late husband to her name. The petitioner has produced a Relationship Certificate issued by the Village Officer to prove her status. She has also produced other documents to support her claim and has paid the requisite fee. She prays for the issue of a direction for the consideration of her application on an early date. Wpc 24796/2010 2 2. The procedure to be followed while considering an application as in the present case has been considered by this court in Bhagyalakshmy v. RTA, Palakkad (2010(2)KLT 431). It is for the second respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with the principles laid down in the decision referred to above. 3. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner in the light of the dictum laid down by this court in the decision referred to above and to pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk