IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH MARCH 2011 / 19TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 7459 of 2011(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ BABU V., MADATHIVILAYIL, PAVUMBA SOUTH, PAVUMBA P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADVS. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.A. ASIF. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: kp P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 7459 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 10th 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 Karunagapally-Pandalam. The regular permit issued to him was valid till 3.1.2011. It is stated that though the petitioner applied for renewal in time, the application has not so far been disposed of and is pending for the reason that concurrence of the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam has not been obtained. The petitioner states that pending disposal of the application for renewal of the regular permit, a temporary permit of four months duration was issued to him under section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act and that it is valid till 3.5.2011. The grievance set out by the petitioner is that though he had submitted Ext.P2 application dated 4.3.2011 for replacement of the vehicle and the requisite fee was also paid on the same day, the respondent, has not till date taken a decision on the said application. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to take a final decision on Ext.P2 application expeditiously. 2. Sri.M.A.Asif, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that Ext.P2 application was submitted only 6 days back and that in such circumstances, the petitioner cannot be heard to contend that there is delay on the part of the respondent in disposing of WPC No.7459/2011 2 the said application. The petitioner is presently operating the stage carriage on the route Karunagapally-Pandalam on the strength of a temporary permit which was issued pending disposal of the application for renewal of the regular permit. Though having regard to the time factor it cannot be said that there was undue delay on the part of the respondent in disposing of Ext.P2 application, in view of the fact that what the petitioner seeks is to replace a 2001 model vehicle with a 2010 model vehicle though with a similar seating capacity, I am of the opinion that having regard to the safety of the passengers and welfare of the travelling public, the respondent should take an expeditious decision on Ext.P2. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P2 petition for replacement of the vehicle and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within two months from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition complete in all aspects before the respondent. Till such time, the temporary permit issued to the petitioner shall be periodically renewed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No.7459/2011 3 WPC No.7459/2011 4