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. 455 of 2009() ----------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- THE SECRETARY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT USED VEHICLES DEALERS AND BROKERS ASSOCIATION 22/31 NAZEEMA BUILDING, JOS AUTOS, PALAMURI, PALAKKAD-6. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PALAKKAD BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009,ALONG WITH WPC NO. 876 OF 2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos. 455 & 876 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Challenge in this writ petition is against the circular No.27/2008 issued by the Transport Commissionerate on 23/12/2008, introducing a new system, whereby all documents will be dispatched through postal department. According to the counsel for the petitioner, this circular offends the Rule 124 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, to the extent relevant, reads as follows; “124. Service of communications to parties:- (1) Any communication issued by the Transport Authorities or the executive officers of such authorities or by the Government or by the Tribunal in respect of matters falling under Chapter V of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, may be served by the executive officers of the Transport Authorities or by any other officer authorized by them in this behalf, by any one of the following methods, namely:- a. by delivery or tender of a copy of the W.P.(C) Nos. 455 & 876/2009 2 communication to the addressee. b. by recorded delivery or under Certificate of Posting. c. by registered post. ” A reading of the above rule show that the authorities are entitled to choose any one of the methods specified therein. Since the authorities are free to choose anyone of the methods specified, I do not find any irregularity in the circular and writ petitions fails. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm