Kerala High Court
Ajesh vs The Regional Transport Authority on 19 March, 2021
W.P.(C) No.5205/2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.5205 OF 2021(A)
PETITIONER:
AJESH,
AGED 25 YEARS
S/O.VAREETHKUTTY, CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE,
THELATHURUTHU, PUTHENVELIKKARA, NORTH KUTHIYATHODU,
ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CIVIL STATION,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.
2 THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP K.P HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.5205/2021 2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of March 2021
The petitioner herein is the holder of a permit which expired in 2014.
Petitioner has submitted application for replacement of the existing vehicle.
Vehicle offered was a medium passenger vehicle with seating capacity of 33 in
all as against the earlier vehicle which was heavy passenger vehicle with seating
capacity of 38.
2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the above application is not
considered by the first respondent and is kept pending as evident from Ext.P8.
3. Learned senior Government Pleader, relying on the statement filed by
the second respondent, vehemently opposed the petitioner's request for
replacement. It was submitted by the learned Government Pleader that, apart
from this, for substantial difference exceeding 25%, by Ext.P2 proceedings it
was clarified that there was a scheme proposed by the Government under
Section 99 of the Motor Vehicles Act for making an objective assessment o the
actual requirement of the KSRTC along the above route is also pending
consideration.
3. Having considered the entire facts,I am inclined to direct that let there
be a finality on the issue by the RTA by taking up the application and passing
appropriate orders strictly on consideration of law, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
It is made clear that no finding is rendered regarding the objections raised
by the respondents. Decision shall be taken by the authority after giving
reasonable opportunity to the KSRTC as well as other objectors if any, to raise
their objections.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
dpk SUNIL THOMAS
JUDGE
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT DATED
18.12.2014.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING DATED
13.02.2015 OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT
AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT VALID
TILL 10.02.2020.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF
PERMIT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY THE APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT
DATED 04.02.2021.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE RC
BOOK IN VEHICLE NO.KL-02-V-5602.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE RC
BOOK IN VEHICLE NO.KL 02/U 8206.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY THE PROCEEDING OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 15.02.2021.
