IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4062 of 2008(H) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- 1. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PRIVATE BUS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, SREECHAKRA, CONVENT LANE, STATUE ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT K.THRIVIKRAMAN. 2. KERALA STATE PRIVATE BUS OWNER'S FEDERATION, REG.NO.ER.660/2005, 19/725(7), FIRST FLOOR, PTKM BUILDING, MASJID ROAD, ALUVA-1, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT KHALID MUNDAPPILLY. 3. MAHESH, S/O. K.SADASIVAN NAIR, TC 27/885, MALLOOR ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SIVAN MADATHIL RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, C/O. COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, C/O. COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DGP, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CITY, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE CITY, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOZHIKODE. WP(C).No. 4062 of 2008(H) -2- ADDL. R7 - RAJARAJESWARY B.S. ÁRUN', NANDAVANAM.P.O. PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R8 - RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, KULANGARA HOUSE, KILIMANOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. R9 - LALITHA BAI.K. T.C. 25/2867, CHEKKALAVILAKOM, NEAR M.G, VANCHIYOOR.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL.R10 - INDIRA, “INDEEVARAM”, T.C. I/910 4, KUMARAPURAM.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 7 10 10 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11.6.2008 IN I.A.7275 OF 2008 ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN FOR ADDL.R10 SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR FOR ADDL. R8 SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI FOR ADDL.R7 SRI.A.INEES FOR ADDL.R9 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 4062 of 2008(H) APPENDIX PETITIONERS'EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 18.12.2007. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION LAST MADE ON 28.12.2007 BY THE 1ST PETITIONER ORGANISATION. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.12.2001 IN W.P.(C) NO. 30660/2001. EXT.P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT REPRESENTATION DATED 16.1.2008. EXT.P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE MALAYALAM DAILIES. DATED AUGUST 9th 10th,, 2007. RESPONDENTS'EXHIBITS: EXT.R7(1) - TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.1.2006 IN O.P. NO. 19809/2002 AND CONNECTED CASES BY THIS COURT. EXT.R7(2) - TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AS PER DIRECTION IN EXHIBIT R7(1). // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P.(C) No. 4062 of 2008 ................................................. Dated this the 3rd day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T The 1st and 2nd petitioners claim to be associations of private bus owners and the 3rd petitioner claims to be a private bus operator of Thiruvananthapuram. They raise two grievances in this writ petition. The first is that the respondents are not taking effective steps for preventing operation of parallel transport services in routes which are earmarked for valid stage carriage permit holders and that respondents 2 and 3 are issuing temporary permits indiscriminately without reference whether, there is temporary need or not. Petitioners therefore seek the following reliefs: “i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondent to take effective steps immediately to stop the operation of parallel transport service in the specified/scheduled routs which are clearly earmarked for the valid permit holders. ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd and 3rd respondent not to issue permits without any check and without due consideration which are badly affecting the operation of the regular permit holder and not to extent the validity of the temporary permit when it expires, and to take immediate steps to publish notification calling application for regular/pucca route permit. W.P.(C) No. 4062 of 2008 -2- iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4th, 5th and 6th respondents to take immediate action against the parallel service operators in their respective jurisdiction by initiating appropriate legal proceedings against them.” 2. As far as the first relief is concerned, there cannot be any doubt that without valid permits, the operation of stage carriages cannot be permitted. If any body conducts any parallel transport service without valid permits, it is the duty of the respondents to take appropriate action. Therefore, there would be a direction to the respondents 2 to 6 to see that whenever such illegal operation of parallel transport services are detected, prompt and effective steps shall be taken against the same. 3. However, I do not think that the 2nd relief can be allowed as a general order. The validity of a temporary permit issued depends on whether there is a temporary need or not. If in respect of a particular temporary permit, the petitioners have got a contention that there is no temporary need, and if they can validly challenge the same, it is for them to challenge the same before the appropriate authorities in accordance with law. This court cannot give a general direction in that regard. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs