IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2008 / 20TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 33878 of 2006(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.J.JOHN, ALUMKAL HOUSE, ANICKAD EAST P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR. 3. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM. 4. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM. 5. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI BENJAMIN PAUL FOR R1 TO 4 ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/08/2008,ALONG WITH W.P.(C)No.720 OF 2007 & CON.CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.33878/06 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA, ERNAKULAM DATED 18.7.2006. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA, THRISSUR DATED 16.8.2006. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA, MALAPURAM DATED 23.9.2006. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY SCHEME ISSUED UNDER SECTION 68-C OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1939 IN FORM-III IN RELATION TO THE NOTIFIED ROUTE KOTTAYAM-THEKKADY. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF APPROVED SCHEME IN RELATION TO THE TRIVANDRUM- KANNUR. TRUE COPY K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)NOS.33878/06, 720/07, 22292/07 & 27093/07 ----------------------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 11th DAY OF AUGUST, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners challenge the orders of the Regional Transport Authorities, directly before this Court without invoking the appellate remedy that is available to them before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. Their applications for fresh permit/renewal of permit/request for concurrence have been rejected on the ground of objectionable overlapping. But, after the decision taken by the Regional Transport Authority, many developments took place subsequently. Government have issued a notification under Section 100(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, modifying 31 supplementation schemes in force. A learned Single Judge of this Court has set aside Clauses 4 and 19 of that Scheme by the judgment in W.P.(c)No.21725/08 and connected cases dated 24.7.2008. 2. The Standing Counsel for the KSRTC submitted that the Corporation is proposing to take up the matter in appeal and the appeal period is not yet over. In view of the subsequent developments mentioned above, whether the petitioners' application could be allowed W.P.(C)NO.33878/06 & Con.Cases -2- is a matter which should be considered at the first instance by the concerned Regional Transport Authorities, we feel. Thereafter, if the petitioners are aggrieved, they can approach the State Transport Appellate Tribunal also. Only thereafter, this Court is required to examine the matter. In view of the said position, the impugned orders in these Writ Petitions are set aside and the applications are remitted to the concerned Transport Authorities. The said Authorities shall hear the petitioners as also the KSRTC and pass fresh orders on the applications for fresh permit/renewal of permit/motion for concurrence, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petitions are disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn