IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21913 of 2010(L) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ D. SUBASH,CHERADIYIL HOUSE, NAGAPPUZHA P.O.,MUVATTUPUZHA BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21913 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a stage carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-6/D 8001 which has a regular permit to conduct services on the route Thodupuzha-Panickankudy, valid till 18.6.2012. As per Ext.P3, the petitioner has applied for the grant of a permit on the extended route from Panickankudy to Nedumkandam via Muniyara. According to the petitioner, there is an imminent temporary need for the services to be conducted on the route in question. According to the petitioner, his request has not been granted by the authority for the reason that he already has a regular permit. The petitioner challenges the said action of the authority contending that a temporary permit could be granted to do an extended service in continuation of the existing regular permit. He also relies on a decision of this Court in Balakrishna Travels v RTO Malappuram (1982 KLT 782). Relying on the above decision, it is wpc No.21913/2010 2 contended that the respondent is bound to consider the application for temporary permit submitted by the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P3. He also submits that the requisite fee has been remitted as evidenced by Ext.P4. 2. The learned Government Pleader has no objection to a direction for the consideration of Ext.P3 being issued in this case. 3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application for temporary permit submitted by the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P3, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/