IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 25384 of 2008(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- T.P. SOBY, S/O. T.V. PAILY, THANIMALAYIL HOUSE, PULCODE.P.O, VIII/372, CHELAKARA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.25384/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ON THE ROUTE THOTTEKKADA-THRISSUR-AYYANTHOLE, WITH RESPECT TO S/C KL-9/J 6936. EXT.P2: PHOTOCOPY OF 1ST PAGE OF RC BOOK WITH RESPECT TO S/C KL-9/J 6936. EXT.P2(a): TRUE COPY OF ENDORSEMENT OF TAX EXEMPTION MADE TO THE RC BOOK OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DT 24.11.2006. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE PARTICULARS OF the REGISTRATION OF VEHICLE NO.KL-48 502. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF the TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF SRI.JOBY M JOY WITH RESPECT TO S/C KL-48 502. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF SRI.JOBY M JOY WITH RESPECT TO S/C KL-48 502. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DT 5.1.2008 IN ITEM NO.132 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DT 5.1.2008 IN ITEM NO.150 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMO IN MVAA 72/2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE STAT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT 19.4.2008 IN MVAA 72/2008 OF THE STAT, ERNAKULAM. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 25384 OF 2008 (V) ==================== Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 J U D G M E N T The challenge is against Ext.P8 as confirmed by Ext.P10. By Ext.P8, the permit of the petitioner was revoked invoking Rule 152 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules and that order was confirmed by the Tribunal by dismissing MVAA 72/08 and Ext.P10 is the judgment. 2. A reading of Exts.P8 and P10 shows that the reason for revoking the permit is that the vehicle KL 9/J 6936, in respect of which permit was granted in the route Thottekode-Thrissur-Ayyanthole, had defaulted service for the period from 01/02/2007 till 31/12/2007. Ext.P8 itself shows that no explanation was filed by the permit holder. 3. Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the vehicle in question was under G form during the period. It is also her case that by Ext.P6, the clearance certificate for transfer was issued and that, since November 2006, it was the transferee who was in possession of the vehicle. According to the counsel when the notice was received from the RTA in relation to the proceedings resulting in Ext.P8, the petitioner was represented by a counsel, who sought one months time and th+at it was declining the said request that Ext.P8 order is passed. WPC 25384/08 :2 : 4. Although none of the contentions now raised are seen urged before the RTA, irrespective of the correctness or otherwise of the contentions raised, still I am inclined to think that the petitioner should be given an opportunity to make an effective representation before the RTA. 5. Accordingly, Exts.P8 and P10 will stand set aside. The RTA is directed to issue notice to the petitioner giving him an opportunity to file his explanation to the proposal for revoking the permit and after affording him an opportunity of hearing, pass fresh orders in this matter. Proceedings shall be completed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp