IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 30963 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.RATNAKARAN, S/O. K KUNHIRAMAN THUSHARA 37/241 B ERALIPARAMBA, KARUVISSERY PO KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOZHIKODE. By GP K S MUHAMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX(WP(C)30963/2009) PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 10.9.2009. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MONEY RECEIPT DTD. 10.9.2009. lgk K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.30963 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is the holder of a driving license with No.2186/76 and Badge No.894/76 issued by the licensing authority, Kozhikode, applied for the grant of an autorickshaw permit, on the ground that he intended to purchase an autorickshaw. He wanted to ply the autorickshaw for the purpose of earning a livelihood for himself and his family. He alleges that there are a number of vacancies available in Kozhikode City for parking autorickshaws and therefore if his application was considered on the merits and granted, he would be able to earn a decent livelihood. However, though he had submitted Ext.P1 application, his complaint is that no orders have been passed thereon by the authorities. He therefore seeks appropriate directions for an early disposal of Ext.P1. The Government Pleader submits that Ext.P1 application would be considered on the merits, though there are no vacancies for the allotment of a permit as sought for by the petitioner in Kozhikode City. Wpc 30963/2009 2 2. If there are no vacancies in the City, the authorities could have rejected the application of the petitioner, which has also not been done in the present case. 3. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for the issue of a regular autorickshaw permit, evidenced herein by Ext.P1, in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk