IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 9808 of 2007(P) -------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ V.K.SREEKUMAR, VATTAPPARAMBIL HOUSE, DESOM P.O., ALUVA. BY ADV. SRI.K.G.ANIL BABU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.9808/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT NO.P.ST.C5/71/01 DT 29.10.01. EXT.P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ROUTE SKETCH OF THE ERNAKULAM SOUTH BUS STAND-KOZHIKODE BUS STAND. EXT.P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE MEETING ON 15.7.2006 IN ITEM NO.25. EXT.P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF REVISION DT 9.10.2006 IN M.V.A.R.P.NO.441/2006. EXT.P5: THE TRUE COPY OF THE M.P.NO.2364/2006 DT 13.11.2006 IN M.V.A.R.P.NO.441/06. EXT.P6: THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE S.T.A.T. ERNAKULAM IN M.V.A.R.P.NO.441/06 DT 6.3.07. EXT.P7: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE STAT, ERNAKULAM IN M.V.A.R.P.NO.249/2008 DT 7.8.08. EXT.P8: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION IN M.V.A.R.P.252/07 DT 8.8.2007. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 9808 OF 2007 (P) ==================== Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T Exts.P3 and P6 are the orders under challenge. 2. Petitioner was an operator on the route Ernakulam-Kozhikode as LSOS having a route length of 188 kms. The permit was valid till 28/10/2006 and the petitioner sought renewal of the said permit. On an application made in this behalf, the RTA, Malappuram had sought the concurrence of the 1st respondent. The 1st respondent considered the matter and rejected the concurrence as per Ext.P3 order. The said order was challenged before the STAT which also confirmed the matter as per Ext.P6, on the ground that the route length exceeded 140 km, as specified in Rule 2(oa) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. It is challenging these two orders the writ petition is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, along with IA No.1802/09, has produced as Exts.P7 and P8 orders passed by the STAT itself in MVARP Nos.249/08 and 252/07, where in identical circumstances STAT has passed orders allowing the revisions setting aside the orders of the RTA concerned declining concurrence and directing grant, subject to the right of the primary authority to decide on the nature of service depending upon WPC 9808/07 :2 : the route length. 4. Taking into account these two orders, I am satisfied that there is a change in the approach adopted by the STAT. In view of this, necessarily, Exts.P3 and P6 has to be set aside and I do so. 5. Accordingly, the 1st respondent is directed to grant concurrence as sought for by the RTA, Malappuram subject to the right of the primary authority to decide on the nature of the service depending upon the route length. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp