IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 18TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 27TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 27318 of 2008(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SHAJI PANAVELIL, PANAVELIL HOUSE, ANGADI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MOTOR TRASPORT WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ANGADI VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. PRASAD, VISHNU BHAVAN, ERNAKULAM, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 5. P.K. BABU, PALAMOOTTIL HOUSE, VALLICODE, PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 BY SC ADV. SRI. K. HARILAL R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - WP.(C) No. 27318 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent was the registered owner of the stage carriage and he sold it and the permit to the fifth respondent and the petitioner purchased the vehicle from him under Ext.P1 agreement. Since clearance from the first respondent was not obtained, the transfer made as per Ext.P1 was not completed and the fifth respondent continues to be the registered owner. The complaint of the petitioner is that recovery proceedings are now taken against him. There is an attachment by the recovery authorities. Fifth respondent approached the Government for instalment facility. By Exts.P2 and P3 the Government granted 30 instalments. The vehicle came to be released by the recovery authorities. But the fifth respondent did not effect payment as directed by the Government. It is the further case of the petitioner that the vehicle is now lying in G Form and it is in the custody of the fifth respondent. Petitioner does not have any objection against proceeding against the vehicle. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the first respondent submits that recovery steps have been taken by proceeding against the vehicle and WPC.27318/2008. 2 he also submits that there is no proceeding against the petitioner as such. I record the submission of the learned counsel for the first respondent and dispose of the writ petition on the basis of the said submission. (K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE) sb