IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 17566 of 2010(U) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.K.AJITHKUMAR, ITTITHARA HOUSE, LOKAMALLESWARAM, KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. R1 TO R4 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.17566 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the holder of a regular Stage Carriage permit conducting services on the route Kozhikode-Medical College- Ernakulam South via Kunnamkulam, Guruvayur, Kodungallur Varapuzha Bridge with Stage Carriage vehicle bearing registration No.KL-47/3600 as a Limited Stop Fast Passenger(LSFP). The petitioner's route is an inter district route, the major portion of which falls within the limits of the first respondent. The remaining portion of the route falls within the limits of respondents 2 to 4. Therefore, the concurrence of the sister authorities are necessary for the grant of renewal of the petitioner's permit. Though the sister authorities have already been addressed by the first respondent, seeking concurrence for the renewal of the petitioner's permit, it is submitted that no action has been taken thereon, till date. Therefore, the petitioner seeks appropriate directions for the consideration of his application on an early date. 2. The learned Senior Government Pleader submits that Wpc 17566/2010 2 respondents 2 to 4 who are the sister authorities, whose concurrence is necessary for the renewal of the petitioner's permit, have not so far issued their concurrence. As on date, only the fourth respondent has issued such concurrence. Therefore, it is submitted that as soon as the concurrence of the other authorities are received, the petitioner's application would be considered. The submission of the learned Government Pleader is recorded. 3. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing respondents 2 and 3 also to take necessary action on the question of issuing concurrence to the application for renewal of permit submitted by the petitioner expeditiously. On receipt of such concurrence from respondents 2 and 3, the application of the petitioner shall be considered by the first respondent, in accordance with law and appropriate orders shall be passed thereon without further delay. No costs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk