IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 18885 of 2008(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- N.P. DINESHAN, NEDIYAPARAMBATH HOUSE, AYANIKKAD, KOYILANDI. BY ADV. MR.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VATAKARA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM. 3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION , TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MOHAMMED HASHIM. R3 BY ADV. MR.V.V. NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 18885/2008-W APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE STAT IN MVAA NO.489/2006 DATED 18/10/2006. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER IN WP(C) NO. 6111 OF 2007 DATED 23/02/2007 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S VEHICLE DATED 28/10/2006. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 27909/2007 DATED 15/10/2007 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE RTA DATED 17/11/2007. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE STAT IN MVAA NO.802/2007 DATED 28/02/2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.18885 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Stage Carriage operator conducting service on the route Kannur - Kozhikode. His permit was issued in respect of Vehicle No.KL-11/L 6082. Before the expiry of the permit, the petitioner had applied for renewal of the existing permit for a period of five years. Pending consideration of his application for renewal of regular permit, he had also applied for the issue of a temporary permit under Section 87(1) (d) of the Motor Vehicles Act. However, by Ext.P5, the petitioner's application for renewal was rejected. The said order has been confirmed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, by Ext.P6. The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 and P6 in this writ petition. 2. According to the counsel for the petitioner, in the light of the subsequent events that have taken place, he is entitled to a direction to have his application for renewal considered afresh. It is pointed out that the Government has brought out a fresh Scheme dated 14.7.2009. As per clause 4 of the said Scheme, permits issued to the private sector on Wpc 18885/2008 2 or before 9.5.2006 are permitted to continue till the dates of expiry of the respective permits. The petitioner claims that his permit being one that is issued prior to 9.5.2006, his application for renewal has to be considered afresh. 3. The counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision of this court dated 11.8.2008 in WP(C)720 of 2007, wherein this court has issued a direction for reconsideration of an application submitted by an operator in similar circumstances. The petitioner therefore prays for a similar direction in this case also. In view of the directions issued by this court in the writ petition referred to above, I feel that the request of the petitioner can be granted. 4. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the application for renewal submitted by the petitioner and to pass appropriate orders thereon 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, untrammelled by the rejection of his permit or the observations in Ext.P5 and P6. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk