Virgini vs The Regional Transport Authority
2022 Latest Caselaw 3405 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
     TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 9254 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

          VIRGINI,
          AGED 65 YEARS
          W/O. YESUDASAN, H. NO.67, SANTHI BHAVAN,
          VILAKKUMBHAGAM, KOLLAM-691001.
          BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS


RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOLLAM-691001.
    2     THE SECRETARY,
          REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM-691001.
          SR.G.P SMT. SHEEJA.C.S


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 9254 OF 2022                        2

                                      JUDGMENT

Petitioner in this writ petition is a "saved

permit holder". Her application for renewal of permit

is not being considered for the reason that, the

route exceeds the limit specified under Rule 2(oa) of

the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, is her

grievance.

2. That the distance limit specified in Rule

2(oa)does not have any application with regard to

"saved permits", has been held by a Division Bench of

this Court in Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

v. Saju Varkey and Ors. [2018 (4) KHC 617] . That the

Government Orders brought in the year 2015 and 2020

are of no relevance in considering the rights of

saved permit holders, has been held by this Court in

Hyderali v. The Regional Transport Authority and Ors.

in W.P.(C) No.8702/2021 and connected cases. The

saved permit holders are entitled for renewal of

their permits till a valid scheme of nationalisation

is brought in, under the provisions of the Motor

Vehicles Act.

3. In the light of the above, it is declared

that, the application for renewal of permit submitted

by the petitioner is liable to be considered without

reckoning the route length.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE sd

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9254/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 03/09/2019 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.