IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2009 / 21ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7816 of 2009(V) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SEKHARAN, S/O. PAZHAMAL, CHEVIDANKAVIL VEEDU, MANIPPAYYUR P.O., CHOVANNUR VILLAGE, KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, THRISSUR. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VIYYUR POLICE STATION, VIYYUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, THRISSUR. MR.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.7816 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 12th day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Grievance of the petitioner is regarding Ext.P6, by which, the 1 st respondent has recommended the 3 rd respondent to suspend the driving licence of the petitioner. The petitioner mainly contends that the suspension in pursuance to Ext.P6 will be ordered without complying with the requirements of Section 19 of the Motor Vehicles Act. 2. Ext.P6, at best, is only a recommendation and the 3 rd respondent has not acted upon the same. True, when a suspension is to be imposed the person affected should be heard as contemplated under Section 19 of the Act. 3. As at present, since Ext.P6 has not been implemented, I have no reason to interfere with Ext.P6. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3 rd respondent to issue notice and hear the petitioner as prescribed under Section 19 of the Act before recommendation in Ext.P6 is implemented. 4. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment WP(C) No.7816/2009 -2- before the 3 rd respondent, who shall independently consider the matter and pass orders thereon. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg