IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 35905 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.L.PRASANTH, ROOM NO.4, P.K.QUARTERS, DOOR NO.150, VIDHYA NAGAR, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.A.INEES RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE ASSISTANT MOTOR VEHICLES INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE REGIOANL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 35905 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 16th December, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator on the interstate route Cheroorkadavu – Mangalore from 1992 onwards, the permit for which was being periodically renewed. Presently, the permit is valid up to 11-7-2011. The permit has also been duly countersigned by the Karnataka State Transport Authority as evidenced by Ext. P2. The petitioner has also subsequently been permitted to replace the vehicle by Exts.P3 and P4 orders. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has not committed any violation of the conditions of the permit. No proceedings have been initiated under Section 86 of the Motor Vehicles Act for cancellation or suspension of the permit also. But, all of a sudden, the petitioner's vehicle was intercepted and Ext. P5 check report has been issued to the petitioner directing him to stop the service immediately. Ext. P5 refers to some orders of the 1st respondent dated 5-12-2009, copies of which also were not furnished to the petitioner. The petitioner also submits that the petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity of being heard before directing him to stop service, which affects his civil rights. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “i) Call for the records leading to Ext. P5 and quash Ext. P5 by the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction, order; ii) declare that the petitioner is legally entitled to operate his service on the inter-state route Cheroorkadavu – Mangalore with stage carriage No. KL-14/G-6979 till its validity of permit up to 11- 7-2011 and renew it further according to law; iii) issue a writ of mandamus of any other appropriate writ, direction or order restraining the respondents from preventing or interfering with the conduct of the regular stage carriage permit of the petitioner on the inter-state route Cheroorkadavu-Mangalore.” W.P.C. No. 35905/09 -: 2 :- 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. Although the learned Government Pleader would argue for sustaining Ext. P5 order, he does not dispute the fact that before directing stoppage of service, the petitioner has not been given an opportunity of being heard. 3. I am of opinion that whatever be the reason, the petitioner could not have been directed to stop the vehicle without first giving him an opportunity of being heard. For that reason Ext. P5 is liable to be quashed. But, in view of the order I propose to pass, I do not think it necessary to quash Ext. P5 as such. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: Ext. P5 shall be treated as a show cause notice issued to the petitioner by the 1st respondent. The petitioner shall file his reply to Ext. P5 within two weeks from today. The 1st respondent shall thereupon afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner by issuing him a notice regarding date of hearing and hear the petitioner. Thereafter, an appealable order shall be passed by the 1st respondent in accordance with law. Needles to say, in the meanwhile, the petitioner shall be allowed to conduct the service. The petitioner shall also be supplied with copies of the orders referred to in Ext. P5 before the date of the hearing. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.