IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 25TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 3RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 28510 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. SRI.A.DAMODARA, AGED 64 YEARS, H.NO.10/549, MAIN ROAD, UPPALA, KASARAGODE. 2. SRI.SAJITH, S/O.DAMODARA, AGED 38 YEARS, JAY RAM NIWAS, H.NO.10/778, UPPALA POST, KASARGODE. 3. SRI.A.SUNIL, S/O.DAMODARA, AGED 35 YEARS, PRASANTHI ROAD, SHAKTI NAGAR, PADUVA VILLAGE, MANGALORE. BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT. SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/09/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,JUDGE ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.28510 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 25th September, 2008 J U D G M E N T First petitioner is a registered owner of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL 14/D 7007 which is stated to be covered with a regular interstate permit on the route Madhur-Mangalore, and second petitioner is the registered owner of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL 14/E 3747 with an interstate permit on the route Chanilla-Malik Deenar Hospital. According to the petitioners, interstate permit is being issued subject to the payment of tax to the Government of Karnataka as well as the Government of Kerala. But the permits are not included in the interstate agreement in question when they had come up for renewal. Petitioners submit that if the permits are included in the interstate agreement between the State of Karnataka and State of Kerala, then they would be in a position to continue to operate the vehicle on the interstate permit. A similar matter has W.P ( C) No.28510 of 2008 2 been considered by this Court in Ext.P5 judgment. Representations filed by the petitioners before the Government as Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4 are pending consideration. 2. I heard learned Government Pleader also. 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4 and take a decision thereon, as expeditiously as possible. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.28510 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No.28510 of 2008 4