IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 17204 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 ALIAS E.M.
EDAYATHUPARAYIL HOUSE, PIRAVOM P.O,
ERNAKULAM - 686664.
2 M.H. SIDHIK,
MARATTIKKUNNEL HOUSE, THODUPUZHA P.O, IDUKKI - 685564.
BY ADV I.DINESH MENON
RESPONDENT:
SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682030.
SRI.V.K.SUNIL GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17204 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
It is a classic case of the high-handedness at the hands of the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Ernakulam of having not accepted the request of the petitioner No.1 for surrendering the permit issued for running the transport vehicle bearing No.KL-17 S 5315 submitted in accordance with the Rule 217 of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the withdrawal notice was submitted to the RTA on 22.04.2022. As and when such one month notice expressing the intention to surrender the permit is received by the office of the transport authority, the authority shall post copy of the notice on the notice board of the authority. It is contended that after expiry of 19 days the notice was published. The vehicle in question has already been sold to petitioner No.2 on 22.04.2022 but petitioner No.1 has to perform the marriage of his daughter and the balance consideration would be received only when the appropriate order is passed under Rule 217. It is WP(C) NO. 17204 OF 2022 3 contended that the certificate in this regard has to be issued as per the judgment of this Court in Ummer P. v. Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram and Another [2011 (2) KHC 372], but for want of the certificate predicament of the petitioner No.1 is writ large.
3. Sri.Justin Jacob, learned Government Pleader accepts notice and submits that the intention of withdrawing the permit ought to have been published immediately on receipt of such notice. Publishing of the same on 12.05.2022 cannot be attributed as a delay on the part of the RTA as the application was required to be examined after verification of the record.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.
5. Since 30 days had already expired on 22.5.2022 the lapse on the part of the authority in not publishing the notice in strict compliance Rule 217 cannot be attributed to be fault of the 1st petitioner who was in dire need of money for the performance of the marriage of his daughter. WP(C) NO. 17204 OF 2022 4 For the reason aforementioned, I allow the writ petition by issuing direction to respondent No.1 to issue certificate of surrender within a period of three days from today as the period of 30 days expressing intention to surrender the permit in respect of the vehicle aforementioned is already over on 21.05.2022.
Sd/-
AMIT RAWAL JUDGE nak WP(C) NO. 17204 OF 2022 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17204/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 01.11.2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RC BOOK OF THE VEHICLE KL-17 S 5315.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT OF SALE DATED 23.04.2022.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DATED 22.04.2022.