IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21236 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KIZHAKKAMBALAM BUS OWERN'S ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY N.A. SUBAIR. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MUVATTUPUZHA, 3. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) 21236 of 2008 -------------------------------------------------------- Dated: JULY 31, 2008 JUDGMENT The prayer in this writ petition is to direct respondents 1 to 3 to take note of Ext.P1 complaint and interdict the operation of KSRTC on the route Muvattupuzha - Ernakulam via Nellad, Pattimattom, Kizhakkambalam and Kakkanad without applying or obtaining permits from the 2nd respondent and getting the same countersigned by the RTA, Ernakulam. 2. The KSRTC has filed a counter affidavit producing Exts.R3(a) to R3(f) temporary permits granted by the Secretary, RTA, Muvattupuzha, in respect of the route Thodupuzha - Ernakulam via Muvattupuzha, Nellad, Kizhakkambalam and Kakkanad. It is relying on Ext.R3 series that the KSRTC has now justifies operation of their vehicles in the aforesaid route. 3. As is evident from Ext.R3 series, these are inter- regional permits covering Muvattupuzha, Ernakulam and WP(C) 21236/08 2 Idukki regions coming within Idukki and Ernakulam Districts. Necessarily therefore such permits could have been granted only by the RTA subject to counter signature, in exercise of the powers under sec.170 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act. This contention canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is fully supported by a Division Bench decision of this Court in Hameed v. Ashokan - 1999 (3) KLT 527. Therefore Ext.R3 series cannot legitimise the operation of the vehicles by the KSRTC. 4. In view of this, the 1st respondent is directed to take action on Ext.P1 complaint filed by the petitioner in the light of this judgment and in the light of the Division Bench judgment referred to above. 5. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE mt/-