Muhammed Ali vs Regional Transport Authority
2022 Latest Caselaw 2683 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 7830 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

    1     MUHAMMED ALI,
          CHUNDAYIL HOUSE, P.O. MUDAVANTHERI, THUNERI,
          VADAKARA, PIN - 673 505.

          BY ADVS.
          I.DINESH MENON
          L.RAJESH NARAYAN



RESPONDENTS:

1         REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
          REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O.,
          VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673 101.

2         THE SECRETARY
          REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT
          OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O., VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673
          101.



          SMT. K.AMMINIKUTTY SR. G.P.




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 7830 OF 2022
                                   2



                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

alleging that 1st respondent is not accepting

his application for renewal of permit of the

State Carriage operated by him, bearing

Registration No.KL-18 S 6363, because the

financier is refusing to issue No Objection

Certificate (NOC). The petitioner, therefore,

prays that respondents be directed to accept

and consider his application for renewal,

without insisting on the aforesaid NOC.

2. The afore request of the petitioner,

made by his learned counsel - Sri.I.Dinesh

Menon, was answered by the learned Senior

Government Pleader - Smt.K.Amminikutty, saying

that even though the petitioner can be allowed

to make an application for renewal physically,

without being accompanied by the NOC, it can be

accepted only after the necessary fees on it is WP(C) NO. 7830 OF 2022

remitted by him online. She submitted that,

therefore, if the petitioner remits the said

fees, his application can be accepted

physically without an NOC from the financier.

3. Recording the afore submissions, I leave

liberty to the petitioner to remit the fees

requisite for the renewal online and to present

the application, along with all necessary

documents and receipt for remittance of fees,

but without being accompanied by an NOC from

the financier; which shall then be accepted by

the competent respondent and acted upon, as

expeditiously as is possible but not later than

two weeks from the date on which it is so

presented.

4. Needless to say, I have not considered

the entitlement of the petitioner to any relief

and it is left open to the competent respondent

to decide it in terms of law, after following

due procedure.

WP(C) NO. 7830 OF 2022

5. At this time, the learned Senior

Government Pleader intervened to say that in

fact, in this case, there is an objection

raised by the financier. If this be so, while

the afore exercise is completed, said Authority

will also be given an opportunity of being

heard.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS WP(C) NO. 7830 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7830/2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 22.01.2016.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL DATED 28.02.2022 WITH DELAY PETITION AND COVERING LETTER.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR NOC DATED 28.02.2022.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION SUBMITTED ON 07.03.2022.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT WP(C) NO.18326/2021 DATED 10.09.2021.