IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34235 of 2010(D) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- SHAJI, PARAVELI VELIYIL, MAYITHARA P.O., CHARAMANGALAM,CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.B.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER CHERTHALA. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, ADB BRANCH, MULLACKAL, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. R1 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI R2 BY ADV. SRI.SAJESH PAUL, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.34235 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 22nd November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of a goods carriage with registration No.KL-4S-7451. The validity of its permit was to expire on 24.7.2010. Subsequently, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 application for renewal of the permit. The contention of the petitioner is that the first respondent is insisting for production of a No Objection Certificate from the second respondent financier in terms of the provisions under section 51(6) of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short `the Act'). It is submitted that the petitioner has already issued a notice in terms of the provisions under section 51(7) of the Act and the second respondent financier has failed to respond to the same. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the first respondent authority is bound to consider the application for renewal of permit in terms of the provisions under section 51(9) of the Act without insisting production of No Objection Certificate. 2. Admittedly, Ext.P3 application has been submitted by the petitioner before the first respondent. Ext.P4 is the receipt produced. However, Ext.P3 application was returned to the petitioner with a direction to resubmit the same along with the No Objection Certificate. WP(C).No.34235/2010 2 When an application for renewal of permit in terms of section 51(6) of the Act is submitted before the competent authority, that authority is bound to take a decision thereon in accordance with the provisions. The said authority cannot return the same without taking a decision thereon. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of as hereunder:- It will be open to the petitioner to resubmit Ext.P3 along with Ext.P6 to the first respondent. In case of receipt of application for renewal of permit from the petitioner, the first respondent shall issue notice to the second respondent and thereafter take a decision thereon with notice to the petitioner expeditiously, at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the application in terms of the provisions under section 51 of the Act. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS