IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 12071 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- N.C.ABDUL AZEES, S/O.KOYAKUTTY HAJI, AGED 25 YEARS, RESIDING AT H.N.C.K.HOUSE, MANKAVE, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, P.O.CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. BY GOVE.PLEADER SHRI V.K.SHAMSUDDIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.12071/08 PETITIONER's EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER DATED 28.12.07 WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOZHIKODE VIDE HIS ORDER NO.11/10703/2007-D DATED 10.10.07. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.12071 Of 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF DECEMBER, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the owner in possession of a Jeep No.KED.2076. According to him, the vehicle has not been plying since 26.9.1999. It is the case of the petitioner that he sent a G Form intimating stoppage of the vehicle. Thereafter he filed Exhibit P1 representation also; but rejecting his contentions, Exhibit P2 order has been passed pointing out that the verification of the registers does not reveal that G Forms have been received in the Office of the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Kozhikode. Challenging Exhibit P2, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. 2. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that subsequently an appeal was filed by the petitioner before the Deputy Transport Commissioner, North Zone, Kozhikode, who also rejected the appeal as per order dated 28.8.2008. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if an opportunity is given to the petitioner to produce materials for W.P.(C)No.12071/08 -2- enabling him to prove his case, the petitioner will be able to satisfy the authorities about the merits of his case. 4. The remedy now available is only to file a revision against the appellate order. It appears that in view of the pendency of the Writ Petition, the petitioner did not file the revision petition. Therefore, if the petitioner files a revision petition within a period of one month from today, the same will be entertained by the revisional authority and the matter will be considered on merits and will be disposed of within a further period of four months from the date of receipt of the revision petition. The petitioner will be free to produce any additional materials. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn