IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 10700 of 2006(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- R.M. PARAMESWARAN, PRESIDENT, SABARMATHI CHARITABLE SOCIETY, KOCHI-18 BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMET, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADDL. RESPONDENTS: 3. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY OFFICE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD P.O. 6. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE. (ADDL. RESPONDENTS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 26.9.2008 IN IA NO.5208/07) . SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 10700 OF 2006-W ----------------------------------------- JUDGMENT The petitioner is the President of a Charitable Society, formed, inter alia, for the welfare of autorickshaw drivers. Many of the nationalized Banks have come forward to extend loans to its members to purchase autorickshaws. But, because of the limitation of autorickshaw permits in the three cities, namely, Kozhikode, Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram, further permits cannot be granted. The members of the petitioner's Society are aggrieved by the limitation imposed by the Government. So, the petitioner filed Ext.P1 representation before the Government and other authorities. During the pendency of the writ petition the petitioner also filed Ext.P2 representation, praying to enhance the limit already fixed, so that some additional permits could be granted to autorickshaws. In this writ petition the petitioner has filed a petition to amend the writ petition, incorporating a further prayer to consider and dispose of Ext.P2. 2. In the counter affidavit filed by the State, it has admitted the WPC 10700/06 2 receipt and pendency of Ext.P2 representation of the petitioner. In view of the above position, the petitioner prays, the 1st respondent may be directed to dispose of that representation expeditiously. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader for the respondents also. If Ext.P2 is even now pending, the 1st respondent may consider and take a decision on the request made therein in accordance with law within four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. 26th September, 2008. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. Nm/