Kerala High Court
Rosamma Rappai vs The Regional Transport Authority on 5 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13989 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
ROSAMMA RAPPAI
AGED 62 YEARS
W/O. RAPPAI, THEKKINIYATH KUNJAMARA HOUSE,
PERINCHERY P.O, CHERPU, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 680306
BY ADVS.
M.JITHESH MENON
P.G.MAHESHKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
THRISSUR REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 680003
2 THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
THRISSUR REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
3 THE THRISSUR DISTRICT
MOTOR TRANSPORT OWNERS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY
LIMITED, MACHINGAL LANE, BEHIND RAGHAM THEATRE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
SRI.S. GOPINATHAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.13989 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2024 The petitioner is the holder of a Regular Permit to operate service on the route Thrissur-Kodungallur-Paravoor- Vypin-Ernakulam Jetty. The permit is issued in respect of Stage Carriage bearing registration No.KL-08BA-2111. The application filed by the petitioner for renewal of permit was rejected by the 1st respondent on 31.01.2019, against which the petitioner had filed M.V.A.A. No.88 of 2019 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.
2. Pursuant to the remand order passed in M.V.A.A. No.88 of 2019, the application for renewal was reconsidered again by the 1st respondent on 21.01.2020 and the same was rejected again in the light of the objections filed by the 3rd respondent, alleging default of repayment of the hire purchase dues. The above order was impugned again by the petitioner before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal by WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 3 filing M.V.A.A. No.89 of 2020. The said appeal was dismissed on untenable grounds, contends the petitioner.
3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had cleared all the arrears alleged to have been due from her and the 3rd respondent has also issued a letter addressed to the 2nd respondent, intimating that they have no objection in granting the renewal of the permit to the petitioner and also the requisite forms for cancellation of the hypothecation. The petitioner has also filed an application for renewal of permit for the subsequent period from 2021 and also for Temporary Permit.
4. Senior Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The respondents denied all the allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that when the Regular Permit application of the petitioner was rejected, the petitioner had approached the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 4 remanded the matter once. After reconsidering the matter, the RTA again rejected the application. The petitioner, thereupon, filed M.V.A.A. No.89 of 2020. The Tribunal considered the matter and found that the liability towards the financier is still subsisting and the financier has not issued NOC. The Tribunal therefore rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner as per Ext.P6 order. In the facts of the case, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief, urged the Senior Government Pleader.
5. The Senior Government Pleader further pointed out that in view of the dismissal of the application by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, there is no application for renewal of permits. As there is no subsisting application for renewal of Regular Permit, the Stage Carriage cannot be operated under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Therefore, no interim relief can be granted to the petitioner, argued the Senior Government Pleader.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 5 respondents.
7. The fact remains that the petitioner has been operating her Stage Carriage since 2011 onwards. The application for Regular Permit was declined earlier by the Tribunal for the reason that NOC from the financier has not been produced. Subsequent to Ext.P6 order, it is an admitted position that the petitioner has cleared the liability and the application for termination of hypothecation has been allowed by the financier.
8. In that view of the matter, the grounds based on which the petitioner's appeal stands rejected as per Ext.P6 do not survive as of now. In the facts of the case, it would be only proper that the original application filed by the petitioner for renewal of permit be reconsidered by the RTA in the changed circumstances along with Ext.P10 application for renewal of permit for the subsequent period.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 1st respondent-Regional Transport Authority to reconsider the WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 6 original application for renewal of permit submitted by the petitioner along with Ext.P10 application for renewal for the subsequent period taking note of the termination notice issued by the financier. As the petitioner has been operating the Stage Carriage on the strength of Ext.P5 till the appeal was pending before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, it would be only appropriate that the petitioner be permitted to operate the service till the RTA takes a decision in the matter. The RTA shall take a final decision in the matter within a period of three months.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13989/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit-P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT WITH WHICH THE PETITIONER WAS OPERATING ON THE ROUTE IN QUESTION DATED 02-07-2013 Exhibit-P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 31-01-2019 Exhibit-P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULUM IN M.V.A.A. NO.88/2019 DATED 03-10-2019 Exhibit-P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21-01-2020 Exhibit-P5 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 01-02-2023 PASSED BY THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULUM Exhibit-P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN M.V.A.A NO.89/2020 PASSED BY THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULUM DATED 16-10-2023 Exhibit-P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 02-02-2024 Exhibit-P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER/JOINT R.T.O, THRIPRAYAR DATED 09-02-2024 Exhibit-P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, THRISSUR ALONG WITH THE REQUISITE STATUTORY FORMS [FORM 35] DULY SIGNED FOR CANCELLING THE HYPOTHECATION DATED 09-02-2024 Exhibit-P10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL FOR THE SUBSEQUENT PERIOD FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29-04-2021 WP(C) No.13989 of 2024 8 Exhibit-P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12-03-2024