IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2010 / 29TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 729 of 2010(M) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. KAIS, S/O.VEERAN, CHELAKKATTIL HOUSE, PATTITHARA, PATTAMBI. 2. KRISHNAKUMARI, W/O. SUNIL KUMAR VAMANAPUREDATHKALATHIL HOUSE, NAGALASSERY, PATTAMBI. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT: --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 729 OF 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is the owner of a stage carriage bus bearing registration No.KLL-8385 in respect of which Ext.P1 permit was issued to operate on the route Koottanadu-Kuttippuram. The said permit was valid till 6.11.2007. By order passed on 30.10.2003, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, permitted the first petitioner to replace the vehicle mentioned in Ext.P1 permit with the vehicle bearing registration number KL11/D 5679 with effect from 30.10.2003. The first petitioner thereafter entered into an agreement with the second petitioner to transfer Ext.P1 permit to the second petitioner retaining the vehicle with her. The petitioners thereupon submitted a joint application for transfer of Ext.P1 permit in respect of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-11/D 5679 operating on the route Koottanadu-Kuttippuram from the name of the first petitioner to that of the second petitioner. The Regional Transport Authority, Palakkad, that met on 20.11.2007 considered the said application and allowed the same subject to clearance of Government dues in respect of the vehicle bearing registration W.P.(C) No. 729/2010 2 No.KL 11/D 5679 and production of NOC from the financier of the said vehicle. 2. Pursuant to the said decision, the petitioners produced Ext.P3 NOC from the financier of the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-11/D 5679 wherein it was certified that the financier has no objection for deletion of their name from the registration certificate of the said vehicle. The grievance voiced by the petitioners is that even after the NOC was produced, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, has not taken steps to endorse the transfer of the permit in her favour on the original of Ext.P1 permit. He submits that though such a stipulation is not set out in Ext.P2, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, has taken the stand that unless the registration particulars of the vehicle with which he proposes to operate Ext.P1 permit are produced, the transfer of permit will not be endorsed on the original of Ext.P1. The petitioner states that original registration certificate of the vehicle described in Ext.P1 permit has been lost irrecoverably and that production of the registration certificate of the said vehicle cannot be insisted upon. The petitioner relies on Exts.P4 and P5 judgments of this Court in support of the said W.P.(C) No. 729/2010 3 contention. 3. Ext.P2 discloses that Regional Transport Authority has granted transfer of Ext.P1 permit from the name of the first petitioner to the second petitioner and that such transfer was permitted on the petitioner producing NOC from the financier of the vehicle belonging to the first petitioner and clearance of Government dues. It is evident from the pleadings that the petitioner does not propose to operate the vehicle described in Ext.P1 permit on the route Koottanadu- Kuttippuram. He proposes to operate a new vehicle on the said route. Therefore as held by this Court in Exts.P4 and P5 judgments, production of the registration certification of the out going vehicle cannot be insisted upon. Further, the question whether any amount is payable by way of tax or otherwise to the Government in respect of the out going vehicle, is a matter which can be ascertained by the respondents from the records in their custody and if at all there are such dues, they can recover it form the first petitioner who continues to be the owner of the said vehicle. The pleadings disclose that the first petitioner has already produced NOC from the financier belonging to first petitioner before the respondents. In such W.P.(C) No. 729/2010 4 circumstance, I find no reason why the transfer permitted as per Ext.P2 should not be endorsed on the original of Ext.P1 permi. I accordingly dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Palakkad to endorse the factum of transfer of permit to the second petitioner on the original of Ext.P1 permit without insisting on production of the registration particulars of the out going vehicle. Necessary steps in that regard shall be taken and completed within two weeks from the date on which the petitioners produce a certified copy of this judgment before the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Palakkad. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE vps