IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18793 of 2009(T) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- HARIDASAN T., THATHAMMAL HOUSE, HOUSE GRAMAM P.O., VELIYANKODU, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SRI.P.BALAKRISHNAN, POOTHIYIL HOUSE, P.O.PANDIKKAD VIA. MANJERI, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. MR.V.G.SANKARAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, MALAPPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.P.K.BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ----------------------------------------------- WP(C) NO. 18793 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, registered owner of the Mini Bus bearing No. KL-11/M 718, had approached this Court earlier by filing WP(C) No.27937/2008 contending that, since the vehicle was not granted a valid permit in respect of the period in question, the petitioner was liable to pay tax only at the rate applicable for Non Transport Vehicles and not at the rate applicable to the Stage Carriage. It was submitted before this Court from the part of the respondents that, the matter was being examined by the departmental authorities and that a decision would be taken shortly. Petitioner submits that, since Ext.P2 [Ext.R1(a) in WP(C) No.27937/2008] was not served to the petitioner, this Court had ordered to serve a copy of the same, so as to enable the petitioner to pursue further steps. 2. Pursuant to Ext.P3 judgment passed by this Court in WP(C) No.27937/2008, a copy of Ext.R1(a) stated therein was served to the petitioner, whereupon the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 statement of objections before the respondent. The case of the petitioner is that, despite filing objections by way of Ext.P4 representation, the respondent is WPC NO.18793/2009 2 not passing any final order, extending the benefit, though similar benefits have been extended to several other persons including as per Ext.P5; denial of which, is cited as an instance of discrimination. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4. After considering the facts and circumstances, the respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 representation in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that till such orders are passed on Ext.P4, all further coercive steps stated as being pursued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE dnc