IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 4401 of 2010(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- P.K.VIJAYAN, PUTHENKANDATHIL HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLY, PERUVA P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. MR.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, RTA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE CHAIRMAN, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 4401 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th February, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner was having a regular permit to operate on the route Kottayam-Bandukka. The route is a long distance inter district route traversing a distance of more than 500 kilometers. The permit was valid till 11.9.2006. The petitioner had submitted an application for renewal of the permit for a further period of five years, under Section 81 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. However, the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner was rejected on the ground that the length of the route exceeded 140 kilometers. The petitioner challenged the rejection order before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The appeal was allowed and the first respondent was directed to renew the permit, to operate as a higher class of service provided the vehicle offered by the petitioner was fit for such operation. Accordingly, the petitioner modified his application and sought renewal of the permit to operate the service as a 'Super Deluxe'. However, the application was again rejected. But, on appeal, the said order was also set aside by Ext.P3 judgment of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. WPC 4401/2010 2 2. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has purchased a brand new stage carriage. He has also been issued with a temporary permit to operate on the route. However, his application for regular permit is still pending consideration of the first respondent. Therefore, he prays for necessary directions to consider and dispose of the same expeditiously. 3. I have heard the Govt. Pleader also. He has submitted that the application of the petitioner will be considered in the next meeting of the first respondent. Though there is a meeting of the first respondent scheduled on 18.2.2010, it is submitted that it is not possible to consider the case of the petitioner on the said date. 4. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the application of the petitioner for regular permit to operate on the route Kottayam- Bandukka by placing the same before the next meeting of the first respondent in accordance with law, 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. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 4401/2010 3 WPC 4401/2010 4 K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: