IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2011 / 21ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 11780 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- JOHN BAPTIST SHIBU ANTONY, S/O.V.V.ANTONY, T.C.75/1878, THOPPIL LANE, PETTAH.P.O., VANCHIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. SRI.G.SUDHEER, SMT.M.JAYASREE. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. M/S.NIPPON TOYOTA, MOOPAN MOTORS, TC.2/2340 (1)NH 47 BYE PASS, ATTINKUZHI, KAZHAKUTTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.N.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR, SRI.P.VISWANATHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.11780/011 V APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF THE TEMPORARY REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF TOYOTA INNOVA CAR. P2(A): COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE- FORM 20. P2(B): COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE - FORM 21. P2(C): COPY OF THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH POLLUTION STANDARDS, SAFETY STANDARDS OF COMPONENTS. P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN RESPECT OF TOYOTA INNOVA CAR DTD. 17/07/2010. P3(A): COPY OF AFFIDAVIT IN RESPECT TO INNOVA CAR DTD. 3/06/2010. P4: COPY OF PERMANENT REGISTRATION DETAILS ISSUED BY THE MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, KERALA. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.R3/15425/T/2010 DTD. 13/04/2010 ISSUED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY. P6: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD. 2/12/2010. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A): COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT. R1(B): COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 13/04/2010. R1(C): COPY OF THE FRESH FORM 21. R1(D): COPY OF THE FIRM FORM 21 IN THE DISPUTED ADDRESS. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 11780 OF 2011 V ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th July, 2011. JUDGMENT The petitioner purchased two vehicles simultaneously – the first one is a Tempo Traveller while the second one is a Toyota Innova car. The petitioner thereafter applied for temporary registration of his vehicles showing his residential address as TC . 33/912, Appan Pillai Road, Titanium P.O, Thiruvananthapuram. Exts.P2 and P2(a) are his applications for temporary registration. Subsequently, the petitioner shifted his residence to TC.75/1878, Thoppil Lane, Pettah P.O, Vanchiyoor Village, Thiruvananthapuram. The second respondent rejected his applications for permanent registration for the reason that the address in his applications was not his correct address. 2. The petitioner thereupon submitted Exts.P3 and P3(a) affidavits showing his present address and intimating the change of his address to the second respondent. He obtained a fresh form 21 as contemplated by Rule 47 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, evidenced herein by Exts.R1(c) and produced the same before the Registering Authority. On the basis of the fresh form, the Tempo Traveller was permanently registered in the name of the petitioner. WPC 11780/2011 2 However, as per Ext.P5, the application for registration submitted by the petitioner in respect of his Toyota Innova vehicle was rejected. Though the petitioner has submitted Ext.P6 representation before the first respondent, no orders have been passed thereon till date. Consequently, the Toyota Innova vehicle which the petitioner has purchased in the year 2010 has been idling in his garage for the past one year. The petitioner therefore seeks the issue of appropriate directions to the first respondent to dispose of Ext.P6 and to compel the second respondent to issue a fresh form 21 to him. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent refuting the contentions of the petitioner. It is submitted by the learned Govt. Pleader that the permanent registration in respect of the Tempo Traveller of the petitioner was granted only on production of fresh form 21. It is incumbent upon the petitioner to produce sufficient proof regarding his address, while requesting for registration of his vehicle. On enquiry conducted by the authorities, as evidenced by Ext.R1(a) it was found that the address shown by the petitioner was not correct. It was also revealed that a vehicle owned by the petitioner earlier had been involved in a criminal case. It was in the above circumstances WPC 11780/2011 3 that Ext.P5 order was passed rejecting petitioner's application for registration. The learned Govt. Pleader also submits that the petitioner's vehicle could be registered provided he produces a fresh form 21 from the second respondent. 4. I have heard counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Govt. Pleader at length. 5. It is not in dispute that the residential address of the petitioner has been changed and that the above fact has been intimated to the first respondent also. At the time of applying for registration, the petitioner was residing at his earlier address and the change in his address had taken place during the interregnum period that his application was remaining pending before the first respondent. It is pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner that there was no concealment of the factum of change of his address, at any time. On the contrary his change of address was duly intimated to the first respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the second respondent was not willing to issue a fresh form 21 to him, without a formal direction in that regard by the first respondent. Since the entire matter is pending consideration of the first respondent in Ext.P6, I am of the view that it is absolutely necessary for the first respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 WPC 11780/2011 4 expeditiously. 6. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider representation of the petitioner evidenced herein by Ext.P6, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is clarified that if the petitioner is able to produce a fresh form 21 as insisted on by the first respondent, permanent registration of his vehicle shall be issued without delay provided, all other conditions are satisfied. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 11780/2011 5