IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 4TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 13TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 37068 of 2004(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- V.C.PHILIP, VATAKUNNEL, MANGANAM, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.INEES RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C., IDUKKI. ADDL.R4. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13.7.05 IN IA NO.10077/05. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAVIKUMAR, SC, KSRTC FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1,2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.37068/04 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER RENEWED TILL 24.10.2002. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF the HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN SLP NO.15796/01 DT 24.9.2001. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES (PAGE NOS.21 AND 22A) OF THE SLP NO.22797/01. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE SLP NO.12797/2001 ISSUED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA TO THE PETITIOENR DATED 18.1.2002. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD 19.9.2002 REJECTING THE CONCURRENCE. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF MVARP NO.306/2002 FILED by the PETITIOENR BEFORE THE HON'BLE STAT DT 4.12.2002. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE STAT IN MP NO.1951/2002 IN MVAR P NO.306/2002 DT 9.12.2002. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE STAT IN MVARP NO.306/2002 DTD 15.9.2004. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 37068 OF 2004 K ==================== Dated this the 4th day of September, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was having a regular permit on the route Medical College Kottayam to Kumily. The permit was issued in 1992 and was renewed till 2002. Thereafter, he applied for its renewal, but concurrence was rejected by the RTA, Idukki by Ext.P5 on the ground that the entire route overlaps the notified route Kottayam Thekkady and Ernakulam Thekkady. This order was confirmed by the STAT by Ext.P8 order in MVARP No.306/2002. 2. The prayer now made before me is a limited one. According to the petitioner, the whole issue regarding the renewal has undergone a change on account of the subsequent draft scheme notifications and the finalised one issued by the State Government on 6/5/2008. In the light of this, petitioner seeks that the matter may be directed to be reconsidered by the 1st respondent. 3. True as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, by virtue of the draft and final scheme notifications, there has been change in the situation and even going by the final scheme notification of 6/5/2008, permits which were issued prior to 9/5/2006 were saved. That WPC 37068/08 :2 : provision has been set aside by this court in the judgment in Vijayan P.K. v. Government of Kerala and others (ILR 2008 (3) Kerala 476). If that be so, in view of all this, I feel the petitioner is justified in requesting for a reconsideration of the matter. 4. Accordingly, in order to have the matter reconsidered, I quash Exts.P5 and 8 and direct that the issue of concurrence sought for by the RTA, Kottayam shall be reconsidered by the 1st respondent within 8 weeks. taking into account the subsequent developments. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp