IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2010 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 31186 of 2010(W) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. PAILY.P.V, PALLUPETTA HOUSE, KOOVAPPADY, PERUMBAVOOR. 2. MOLLY, CHIRAYATH HOUSE, KOOVAPPADY, PERUMBAVOOR. 3. BABY, PUNNAKKAL HOUSE, VADAVUCODE, PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADVS. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, PERUMBAVOOR, PIN 683 542. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO.31186 OF 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The first petitioner is the registered owner of goods carriage vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL 07/K 1564 and KL 07/B 2799. The second and third petitioners are the registered owners of goods carriage vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL -07/W 8829 and KL -02/F 624 respectively. The petitioners submitted applications for permission to alter the said vehicles as generator mounted vehicles (non-transport) as per Exts.P5 to P8. Necessary fees for such alterations were also remitted. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite the receipt of Exts.P5 to P8 applications, no decision has so far been taken by the respondent on their respective applications. It is in the said circumstances that this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Earlier, the question whether mounting of generator on a motor vehicle would offend section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act' only) came up for consideration before this Court and considering the various aspects of the issue, this Court found that by merely mounting the generators, the basic features of a motor vehicle W.P.(C) NO.31186/2010 2 would not be changed and resultantly, it would not offend Section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The petitioners contend that this Court has reiterated the above position in Exts.P9 and P10 judgments and therefore, they are entitled to get identical reliefs. If there is no change in the basic features by mounting the generator, one cannot contend that mounting the generators would offend section 52 of the Motor Vehicles Act. In fact, in the aforesaid judgments, it was held that mounting generators would not change the basic features of a motor vehicle. In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason for the non-consideration of the applications submitted by the petitioners. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the question whether granting such requests made by the petitioners as per Exts.P5 to P8 would involve change in classification as well is yet another matter which requires consideration. Since all the aforesaid vehicles are goods carriage vehicles apparently, such alteration would not result in change of classification. That apart, if at any time the classification was changed, it would open to the respondents to take appropriate action. But such apprehensions cannot be a reason for not W.P.(C) NO.31186/2010 3 considering the requests made by the petitioners in Exts.P5 to P8. Considering the fact that the respondent has already received Exts.P5 to P8, the respondent is bound to consider the same and pass orders thereon. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider Exts.P5 to P8 applications and grant permission for alteration of the aforesaid vehicles bearing registration Nos.KL-07/K- 1564, KL-07/B-2799, KL-07/W-8829 and KL-02/F-624 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this judgment will not stand in the way of the competent competent authorities to take action in accordance with law, in case the classification of the above vehicles were changed by the petitioners. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO.31186/2010 4 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO.31186/2010 5