Kerala High Court
Abdul Thahir vs The Secretary on 22 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943
WP(C).No.4005 OF 2021(A)
PETITIONER:
ABDUL THAHIR
AGED 50 YEARS
THENAMPULAKKAL HOUSE,
EDARIKODE P.O.,
TIRUR,
MALAPPURAM 676 501.
BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON
RESPONDENT:
THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
MALAPPURAM,
CIVIL STATION P.O.,
UPHILL, MALAPPURAM 676 505
OTHER PRESENT:
SR.GP K.P HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-03-
2021, THE COURT ON 22-03-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).4005/2021
2
JUDGMENT
One Muhammed Shareef is the holder of the regular permit with
respect to route Malappuram-Vengara in respect of his vehicle No.KL-
14D-2911 whose permit was to expire on 31.03.2021 by virtue of Ext.P2
Government order. A joint application was submitted by the said
Muhammed Shareef along with the petitioner for transfer of the said
vehicle, which was allowed by Ext.P4 application. The renewal of
permit application was allowed as Ext.P3. The petitioner proposed to
replace KL-14D-2911 with a new vehicle KL-55X-2077. This was
refused by the authority holding that the documents in relation to the
earlier vehicle and the current records were liable to be produced. It
was also stated that, transfer of permit cannot be endorsed on a new
vehicle unless the tax clearance is effected. This is under challenge in
this Writ Petition and he also seeks a direction to the authority to
consider the application and to endorse replacement of the vehicle with
KL-55X-2077. Petitioner relies on Ext.P6 judgment of this Court,
wherein, this issue was considered.
2. Evidently, Ext.P6 judgment refers to a situation, wherein, the
current records of the outgoing vehicle was sought. This was purported
to be on a ground that, it was intended to verify whether tax was due. It
was held that, in relation to the outgoing vehicle, no RC book is liable to
be produced since for the purpose of verifying whether tax has been
W.P(C).4005/2021
paid, other records are available.
3. Opposing the application, learned Senior Government
Pleader relied on the statement filed by the respondent. In the
statement, it is stated that, vehicle KL-14D-2911 stands registered in
the name of Muhammed Shareef. The application for transfer of permit
in respect of stage carriage vehicle KL-14D-2911 in the name of
Muhammed Shareef to the name of the petitioner was granted by the
RTA. The decision of the RTA granting permit was communicated to
both the applicants by a communication on 20.09.2019 directing them
to produce the current records of the vehicle KL-14D-2911 within 14
days. It was asserted that the said vehicle has no valid tax/certificate of
fitness for endorsing the grant of transfer of permit. Moreover, in spite
of communication of the order of the RTA, petitioner had not
approached that office for resuming the service of the vehicle and to
provide current records of the vehicle within the stipulated time. It was
asserted that, instead of conducting the service on the road, the grantee
kept the vehicle under the non use of intimation in form-G for the period
01.04.2018 onwards. According to the authority, vehicle KL-14D-2911
was under continuous form-G from 01.04.2018 to 31.03.2021. On
05.01.2021, the registered owner submitted request for replacing the
above permit to another vehicle KL-06D-5493 and renewal of the permit
application, which is valid upto 18.01.2021. Though the petitioner was
called for a personal hearing and heard, the petitioner and the permit
holder of the vehicle repeated the request to replace the permit to the
W.P(C).4005/2021
new vehicle, KL-06D-5493 and then to transfer the vehicle to his name.
He was directed to update the records of vehicle No. KL-14D-2911 so as
to endorse transfer.
4. The above facts reveal that, now, rival contentions are set up
by both the persons, the petitioner as well as Muhammed Shareef.
Ext.P7 replacement application filed by the petitioner is still pending.
Having considered this situation that has arisen, I am inclined to
dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the RTA to take up Ext.P7
application as well as the application submitted by Muhammed Shareef
to replace the permit with another vehicle and to pass appropriate
orders on both the applications as expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
Sbna JUDGE
W.P(C).4005/2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
27.12.2020
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION DATED
5.1.2021
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS GRANTING
TRANSFER OF PERMIT DATED 10.7.2019.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
WP(C).NO.12000/2007 DATED 6.6.2007
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN
WP(C).NO.1284/2021 DATED 29.1.2021
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLACEMENT APPLICATION
DATED 9.2.2021.
