IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21979 of 2010(V) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ C.MANOJKUMAR, PUTHIYAVEEDU, KURA.P.O, KOTTARAKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21979 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th July, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage carriage operator conducting services on an inter regional route Punalur-Ernakulam with stage carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-24/7007. The petitioner's service traverses Ernakulam, Kottayam, Pathanamthitta and Kollam. He was operating his services on the strength of a regular permit as a Limited Stop Ordinary Service (LSOS). The validity of the regular permit expired on 6.8.2009. Therefore, on 10.7.2009, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 application for the renewal of his permit. 2. Since the petitioner's route is an inter regional route, concurrences had to be obtained from the sister authorities before his renewal to be granted. Accordingly, the concurrences have been obtained, as evidenced by Exts.P3 and P3(a). Therefore, the petitioner's application is ripe for consideration. However, since the route length of the petitioner is 173 kms., as per the rules, the permit cannot be renewed as an LSOS. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P5 representation for conversion of his service as a Super Fast Service. Since concurrences of wpc No.21979/2010 2 the sister authorities have already been obtained, the petitioner contends that no further concurrence is necessary. He, therefore, seeks appropriate directions for the consideration of his renewal application along with Ext.P5, expeditiously. The learned Senior Government Pleader has no objection to such a direction being issued. 3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P5 request in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The respondent shall also take note of Ext.P4 judgment of this Court. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/