IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36811 of 2010(B) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ VARGHESE P.I., PAROKKARAN HOUSE, KARUKUTTY, MAMBRA, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADVS. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN, SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY CUM THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM-682 030. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.36811 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 20th December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the registered owner of stage carriage bearing registration No. KL 4/M 6440 operating on the route Angamaly - Ernakulam High Court Junction. The vehicle required major repairs and therefore, it was garaged from 1.7.2010 to 30.11.2010. According to the petitioner, in terms of the relevant provisions `G' Form has been submitted for the aforesaid period. The learned Government Pleader submitted that it was submitted only for the period from 1.8.2010 to 30.11.2010. For the purpose of getting the vehicle released from the garage certificate of fitness is to be obtained besides payment of tax. For that purpose the petitioner has approached the respondent. However, instead of considering the said request of the petitioner he was served with Ext.P2 series of charge memos, it is submitted. In the said circumstances, this writ petition has been filed challenging Ext.P2 series of charge memos issued in respect of the stage carriage with registration No. KL 4/M 6440 and also with the further prayer to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to accept the vehicle tax in respect of the said vehicle without insisting for payment of compounding WP(C).No.36811/2010 2 fees mentioned in Ext.P2 series. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader. 3. Evidently, the grievance of the petitioner is that for the purpose of considering the request for grant of fitness certificate and also to receive the tax in respect of the aforesaid vehicle the respondent is insisting payment of the compounding fees mentioned in Ext.P2 series. The question whether compounding the offences alleged against a stage carriage permit holder in the check reports could be insisted as a condition or pre-requisite for consideration of an application for renewal of permit, to receive the motor vehicle tax or to issue fitness certificate etc., came up for consideration before this Court in a number of writ petitions. I have considered the same question in W.P.(C)No.33702 of 2010 and relying on the judgment in W.P.(C)No.24496 of 2005 (Ext.P3 judgment herein) the said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to consider the application made by the concerned stage carriage operator without insisting compounding of offences alleged against the concerned permit holder. In the light of Ext.P3 judgment and also the judgment in W.P.(C)No.33702 of 2010 this writ petition is disposed of as hereunder:- WP(C).No.36811/2010 3 The application submitted by the petitioner for grant of fitness certificate shall be considered by the respondent in accordance with law without insisting compounding of offences alleged against the petitioner as per Ext.P2 series. The motor vehicle tax in respect of the vehicle KL 4/M 6440 shall be received without any such persistence. The petitioner shall clear entire motor vehicle tax arrears. The above directions will not relieve the petitioner from conforming to the other statutory requirements, if any. At any rate, the above mentioned requests of the petitioner shall not be denied solely for the reason that the petitioner has failed to clear the check reports. It is made clear that this order will not stand in the way of the respondent to take appropriate action in accordance with law for the offences alleged as per Ext.P2 series. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS