IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2009 / 21ST ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 13188 of 2009(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHERSHAD ALI, S/O. NABEESA, THOTTAPURATH HOUSE, THIRUVANNURNADA.P.O, WEST MANKAVU, CALICUT. BY ADV. SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CALICUT REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-20. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, CALICUT-20. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.S.MUHAMMAD HASHIM FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 13188 of 2009(P) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 5.10.2005 TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 5.2.2009 WITH A/D CARD. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 13188 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 13th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner originally purchased an auto rickshaw bearing Registration No. KL 11 J 7441. That was purchased as per a higher purchase agreement. Since the petitioner did not pay the purchase price, the financier repossessed the vehicle. Subsequently, the petitioner purchased another auto rickshaw namely KL 11 AC 2274. The petitioner wanted the permit of the earlier auto transferred to this new vehicle. The 3rd respondent refused to transfer the same without the consent of the financier of the earlier vehicle. The petitioner challenges the action of the 3rd respondent seeking the following relief: “1. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 2 and 3 to transfer Calicut City permit No-3734 which was given to the petitioner to his new auto rikshaw bearing registration No-KL-11AC-2274.” 2. I am of opinion that since there is a provision for such transfer, the 3rd respondent should consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically since he is trying to earn a livelihood by self employment. As far as the 1st auto rickshaw is concerned, W.P(C) No. 13188 of 2009 -2- the financier has taken it away and he has taken steps to sell and realize his dues. Therefore, I am of opinion that the consent of the 1st financier need not be an impediment for transferring the permit for the earlier vehicle to the petitioner's new vehicle. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the application for transfer of permit filed by the petitioner in the light of the findings above, if the petitioner is otherwise entitled to such transfer. Such orders shall be passed within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs