IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 16068 of 2010(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOHANRAJ.V.A., PALAKKADAVATH HOUSE, P.O.NIT, KALLANTHODE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE. BY SR.G.P.K C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.16068 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF MAY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the holder of a regular permit on the route Areekode-Kozhikode valid upto 18.9.2013. The petitioner's vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/R 2182 is a 2003 model vehicle. He wants to replace the same with a 2009 model vehicle bearing registration No.KL-57/B 7059. The petitioner has submitted an application for replacement, which is Ext.P4. As per Ext.P5, the respondent has directed the petitioner to produce a No Objection Certificate from the financier. The petitioner challenges the said stipulation in Ext.P5 contending that insistence on production of a No Objection Certificate from the financier is unnecessary for granting replacement of a vehicle. The petitioner also relies on Ext.P6 judgment of this court in WP(C) 12680 of 2008, in which it has been held as follows:- “ In my view, replacement of a stage carriage Wpc 16068/2010 2 does not amount to change in class attracting Section 51(6), unlike a taxi car, and if that be so, for that reason also No Objection Certificate from the financier is not a requirement for making an application. For this reason, the decision relied on by the counsel for the petitioner has no relevance. The fact that there is no statutory provision requiring the production of No Objection from the financier has also been accepted by this court in the judgment in WP(C) No.10812 of 2007”. 2. In view of the above decision of this court, the stipulation contained in Ext.P5 directing the petitioner to produce a No Objection Certificate from his financier is without any justification. 3. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application for replacement of the vehicle submitted by the petitioner, evidenced herein by Ext.P4, without insisting on production of a No Objection Certificate from his Wpc 16068/2010 3 financier and to pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk