IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 22ND MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 250 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.1797/2010 Dated 19/01/2010 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER: ------------------------- WILSON, S/O.ANTHONY, KARUTHY HOUSE, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT: --------------- THE JOINT R.T.O., IRINJALAKUDA. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN, Ag. C.J. & THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.A. No. 250 OF 2010 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 JUDGMENT Raman, Ag. CJ. When there is a statutory remedy available under law, an aggrieved person cannot bye-pass such remedy and approach this court. In this case, Ext.P5 order was challenged in the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In fact, it is an appealable order under Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Learned Single Judge, following the decision in Biju Chacko v. The Deputy Director of Mining & Geology (2006 (1) KLJ 401) declined to interfere since the appellant/petitioner has got an effective alternate remedy. We do not find any illegality in the order passed. In the circumstances, the appeal fails. Dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Knc/-