IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2011 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 9258 of 2011(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- PRASAD.P., PUNNETH HOUSE, P.O.VADOOKKARA, THRISSUR-780 007. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR-680 001. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR-680 001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.M.MANOJ FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: dmb WP(C).No. 9258 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE EMPLOYMENT OFFICER DATED 15.9.2010 EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE BOOK OF THE VEHICLE DIESEL AUTORIKSHAW KL-8/AT-1275 DATED 14.9.2010 EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.9.2010 EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE CHALLAN DATED 16.9.2010 EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 16.3.2011 EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.G.O(P) NO.68/92/PW&T DATED 28.7.1992 EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN MVAA NO.197/2010 DATED 15.12.2010 EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN MVAA 199/2010 DATED 15.12.2010 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE dmb P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 9258 OF 2011 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, the owner of an autorikshaw bearing registration No.KL-08/AT-1275, applied for the grant of a fresh autorikshaw permit by submitting Ext.P3 application dated 16.9.2010 to enable him to run the autorikshaw within the local limits of Thrissur Corporation with halting place at Koorkanchery. By letter dated 16.03.2011, a copy of which is produced as Ext.P5, the Regional Transport Officer, Thrissur, who is also Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur, informed the petitioner that his application cannot be considered in view of an earlier decision taken by the Regional Transport Authority on 11.05.2010, not to issue autorikshaw permits within the local limits of Thrissur Corporation. The letter also stated that the validity of the said decision of the Regional Transport Authority is pending before the court and that depending on the decision of the court, the question of grant of fresh permits within Thrissur Corporation limits will be considered. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction W.P.(C).No. 9258 OF 2011 2 to the respondents to take a final decision on Ext.P3 application on the merits. Relying on Ext.P6 notification dated 28.07.1992 issued by the State Government and Exts.P7 and P8 judgments of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, it is contended that there is no restriction on the number of autorikshaw permits to be issued in Thrissur Corporation and therefore the stand taken in Ext.P5 cannot be sustained. 2. From a reading of Ext.P6 notification issued by the State Government under clause (a) of sub section (3) of section 74 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it is evident that it applies only in the cities of Kozhikkode, Kochi and Thiruvananthapuram and not to Thrissur Corporation. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal has, by Exts.P7 and P8 judgments, set aside the orders passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur rejecting the applications submitted by autorikshaw owners, who already hold valid permits, for variation of the halting place on the ground that Ext.P6 notification does not apply to Thrissur Corporation. In the light of the decisions evidenced by Exts.P7 and P8 and the contents of Ext.P6 notification, the stand taken by the second respondent in Ext.P5 cannot be sustained. The W.P.(C).No. 9258 OF 2011 3 petitioner is, in my opinion, entitled to have his application considered by the Regional Transport Authority on the merits. I accordingly allow the writ petition and direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's application for the grant of an autorikshaw permit on the merits expeditiously, and in any event, within two months from the date on which, the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before the second respondent. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE dmb