IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2008 / 5TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 14032 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- HARIS.H, S/O. HANEEFA, VAINTHARA KIZHAKKATHIL HOUSE, PADA NORTH .PO.,VIA KARUNAGAPPALLY,KOLLAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER KARUNAGAPPALLY. 2. HEAD CLERK SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT 3. STATE BANK OF INDIA NELSON COMPLEX, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 690 502 BY ADV. SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI, SC, HDFC FOR R3 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.V.MANOJ KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.14032/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT RELATING TO VEHICLE NO.KL 02 Q 0055. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF BUS NO.KL-02 Q 0055. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE BALANCE STATEMENT ISSUED BY THE STATE BANK OF INDIA IN THE MONTH OF APRIL 2005. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF the COUNTER FOIL EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RS.87,000/- BY THE PETITIONER TO THE STATE BANK OF INDIA. EXT.P5: TRUECOPY OF the COUNTER FOIL EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF RS.900/- TO THE STATE BANK OF INDIA. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FINANCIER STATE BANK OF INDIA, KAYAMKULAM BRANCH FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NOC. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY M/S.FIRST FLIGHT COURIERS LTD,KAYAMKULAM ON 5.4.2008. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF PERMIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE JOINT RTO, KARUNAGAPPALLY. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDNENT ALONG WITH EXT.P8 APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF PERMIT. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF the ENDORSEMENT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 28.4.2008 ALONG WITH EXT.P8 APPLICATION. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 14032 OF 2008 U ==================== Dated this the 27th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner submits that he is an operator of a contract carriage. According to him, he submitted Ext.P8 application for renewal of the permit and the office of the 1st respondent returned the application for renewal, with Ext.P10 endorsement directing resubmission of the application with NOC/termination papers of the financier. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the endorsement is factually erroneous and that Ext.P9 declaration under Section 51(7) was produced along with the application. 2. On instructions learned Government Pleader submits that the application received was an invalid one and it was not accompanied either with an NOC or a declaration and that it was in these circumstances the application was returned. 3. I have no reason to disbelieve the version of the official respondents. However, since, even according to the official respondents, the application was returned for non submission of the NOC or a declaration, it should be open to the petitioner to submit a fresh WPC 14032/08 :2 : application enclosing the required documents. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that it will be open to the petitioner to submit a fresh application for renewal of his permit accompanied by either NOC or a declaration as required under Section 51(7) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. If a proper application as above is received by the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent shall issue notice to the 3rd respondent also and thereafter pass orders in the matter. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp