IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 18TH MAGHA 1932 WP(C).No. 3865 of 2011(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- AJI BEEGAM,AGED 34 YEARS,W/O.KOCHUMON, PUTHUVAL VEEDU,NEAR K S R T C STAND,KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF ROAD TRANSPORT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,ALAPPUZHA – 688 001. 3. JOINT R.T.O,OFFICE OF THE JOINT R.T.O, KAYAMKULAM – 690 502. 4. THE SECRETARY,KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, KAYAMKULAM – 690 502. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANTH BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 3865 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of February, 2011 J U D G M E N T Ext.P10 report submitted by the Assistant Motor Vehicles Inspector, Kayamkulam to the Regional Transport Authority, Alappuzha on the petitioner's application for grant of a regular permit for her autorickshaw is under challenge in this writ petition. The pleadings disclose that the petitioner had earlier moved this Court by filing a writ petition seeking expeditious disposal of the application for permit. The said writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P7 judgment, with a direction to the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Kayamkulam to consider the petitioner's application for the grant of a permit with halting place near the City Hospital, Kayamkulam in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. From the writ petition it is evident that till date orders have not been passed on the petitioner's application for regular permit with halting place near the City Hospital, Kayamkulam. In such circumstances, the present writ petition according to me is premature. If pursuant to Ext.P7 report, the Joint Regional WPC No.3865/2011 2 Transport Officer rejects the petitioner's application, her remedy is to challenge the same in appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. If the petitioner's grievance is that orders have not been passed on her permit till date notwithstanding the direction in Ext.P7, her remedy is to initiate proceedings against the concerned officer under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The writ petition fails and is dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the order passed on her application for permit if it is rejected in other appropriate proceedings or her right to move this Court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non compliance with Ext.P7 judgment. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.3865/2011 3 WPC No.3865/2011 4