IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 37718 of 2010(L) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- JACOB MATHEW, 5/228, KOCHUPURACKAL, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM (THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM) – 682 001. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J. ------------------------------- WP(C).NO. 37718 of 2010 --------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondent to collect motor vehicle tax due for the petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No.KCF.8686, only as per schedule 12 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Taxation Act. According to the petitioner, the vehicle in question is fitted with a Generator and it is commonly used as a Generator Van and therefore the rate of tax applicable is as provided in schedule 12 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Taxation Act. It is further stated that the alteration effected in this regard has already been endorsed in the RC book. But the tax endorsement regarding the rates applicable to non-transport vehicle was not endorsed. Since the class of vehicle has not been changed, the petitioner is being compelled to make payment of tax applicable to the 'goods carriages'. 2. According to the petitioner the question now stands covered by a decision of this court in WP(C).No.20936/2004 (Ext.P3 judgment dated 26.9.2005) and on that basis the petitioner is also entitled for getting endorsement of tax at the WP(C).37718/2010 2 rates applicable to a non-transport vehicle. Hence the petitioner is seeking direction in this regard. 3. It is noticed that Ext.P1 request submitted by the petitioner in this regard before the respondent is pending consideration and disposal. Hence I am of the view that a decision need be taken by the respondent, at the earliest. 4. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1 application after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after taking note of the dictum laid by this court in Ext.P3 judgment. 5. The needful shall be done by the respondent at the earliest , at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.K.ABDUL REHIM,JUDGE pmn/ WP(C).37718/2010 3