IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2009 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10324 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ JOHN JACOB, KALATHOTTUKARAN HOUSE, CHELAKOTTUKARA, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 10324 OF 2009 (I) ===================== Dated this the 31st day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that by Ext.P1 proceedings of the RTA, Trichur, transfer was allowed subject to clearance of Government revenues and production of NOC from the financier. According to the petitioner, in view of the fact that the vehicle had become more than 15 years old, he made Ext.P3 application for replacement of the vehicle. According to the petitioner, since endorsement of the transfer allowed by Ext.P1 has not been made so far, his application for replacement has not been considered. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, he has complied with the conditions of Ext.P1, there is no reason why the necessary endorsement of transfer is not made. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing that if the conditions of Ext.P1 have all been complied with by the petitioner, endorsement consequent on Ext.P1 shall be made by the respondent and on that basis, his application for replacement WPC 10324/09 :2 : shall also be considered. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, on production of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp