IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2010 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 35100 of 2010(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ RENI PETER, PULINILKUMKALAYAIL HOUSE, KOTHANALLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KANNUR. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.35100 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 15th December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was holding a regular permit to conduct stage carriage service on the route Koruthode - Panathur with stage carriage bearing registration No. KL-05/U 6006. It is an inter-regional route. Ext.P1 regular permit issued to the petitioner was valid only up to 25.11.2009. Prior to its expiry the petitioner has submitted an application for its renewal. Ext.P2 series would reveal that based on the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of Ext.P1 permit concurrence from the sister Regional Transport Authorities were sought for and obtained. Since the route length exceeds 140 Kms. taking note of the amendment brought into Rule 2 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 as Rule 2 (ub) the petitioner has submitted Ext.P4 representation before the respondent for converting the service as Super Express. Aggrieved by the delay in the matter of disposal of the said representation submitted for the purpose of conversion of the service as super express,this writ petition has been filed. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader. WP(C).No.35100/2010 2 3. Ext.P1 would reveal that the petitioner was holding a regular permit to conduct stage carriage service on inter-regional route. It was for its renewal that he has submitted application before the respondent. Ext.P2 series would reveal that on obtaining the application for renewal concurrence from the sister Regional Transport Authorities were sought and the requisite concurrence were granted. The petitioner was constrained to file Ext.P4 representation in terms of the amendment brought into Rule 2 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 as Rule 2(ub) and also on account of the fact that the route length of the service which is being conducted by the petitioner exceeds 140 Kms. Since Ext.P4 representation is submitted before the respondent and it is pending consideration, the said authority has to take a decision thereon in accordance with the provisions. Therefore, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised in this writ petition it is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation for conversion of the stage carriage service which is being conducted by the petitioner with stage carriage bearing registration No. KL-05/U 6006 as Super Express expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner submits that in view of the fact that the request is only for conversion which in fact, WP(C).No.35100/2010 3 amounts only a reclassification there is no need for obtaining further concurrence from the sister Regional Transport Authorities. To canvass the said point the petitioner relies on Ext.P5 judgment of this Court. While considering the issue involved in this matter, the respondent shall look into Ext.P5 judgment as well. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // True copy // P.S. to Judge