Kerala State Road Transport ... vs Joy.M.P
2023 Latest Caselaw 4698 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                     &
              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
        Wednesday, the 12th day of April 2023 / 22nd Chaithra, 1945
                             WA NO. 841 OF 2022

    AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 12.01.2022 IN WP(C) 21547/2020 OF THIS COURT




APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT:

     KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING
     DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 023.

BY SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN & ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO




RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:

  1. JOY.M.P.,, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.PAULOSE, MANGALATH PUTHENPURAYIL
     HOUSE, KOORACHUND POST, PIN-673 527, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

    AND 3 OTHERS.

BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2 TO 4

     Prayer for interim relief in the Writ Appeal stating that in the
circumstances stated in the appeal memorandum, the High Court be pleased
to pass an order staying all further proceedings in pursuance of the
judgment dated 12.01.2022 in WP(C) No.21547 of 2020 pending final disposal
of the Writ Appeal.
     This Writ Appeal again coming on for orders along with connected
cases on 12/04/2023 upon perusing the appeal memorandum and this court's
order dated 07/07/2022, the court on the same day passed the following:

                                                                      P.T.O.
 A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
   -----------------------------------------
       W.A.Nos. 780/2022,    772/2022, 773/2022,
       774/2022, 775/2022,    779/2022, 830/2022,
       831/2022, 832/2022, 833/2022, 834/2022,
       835/2022, 836/2022, 837/2022, 838/2022,
       839/2022, 840/2022, 841/2022, 842/2022,
       843/2022, 844/2022, 846/2022, 865/2022,
       887/2022, 1155/2022, 1156/2022 & 931/2020
       -----------------------------------------
        Dated this the 12th day of April, 2023

                          O R D E R

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

These matters were heard on 10/4/2023 for

passing interim orders.

2. KSRTC is the appellant. The writ petitions

were filed by private stage carriage operators

challenging G.O.(M.S)No.22/2020/Tran, dated

01/07/2020, withdrawing an earlier Government Order

bearing No. 45/2015/Trans, dated 20/8/2015.

According to the writ petitioners, they are holders

of saved permits and they are entitled to operate

at least until such time as a valid Scheme of

Nationalisation or a modification of the earlier

Scheme, is brought in under the provisions of the

Motor Vehicles Act. They relied on the judgment of W.A.Nos. 780/2022 and conn.cases

this Court in KSRTC and others vs. Saju Varkey

[2018(4) KLJ 145]. The learned Single Judge

disposed of the writ petitions holding that these

operators are entitled to operate de hors the

Government Orders dated 20/8/2015 and 1/7/2020.

Aggrieved by the said judgment, KSRTC approached

this Court with these appeals. Pending writ

appeals, some of the operators, operating on the

route in question, have also come up with

interlocutory applications to renew temporary

permits for a certain period which is opposed by

KSRTC.

3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for

KSRTC Shri Renjith Thampan argued in detail and

submitted that in the light of the amended Kerala

Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, these operators are

not entitled to renewal of permits.

4. The definition of the Ordinary Limited Stop

Services of the amended rules reads as follows: W.A.Nos. 780/2022 and conn.cases

(oa) "Ordinary Limited Stop Service" means a service, which is operated on a route having a distance of not exceeding 140 Kilometres with limited number of stops, having atleast one stop in every fare stage."

5. The point to be considered in these

appeals is whether these operators are entitled to

hold the permits as saved permits in the light of

judgment in Saju Varkey's case (supra). It is to be

noted that the learned Single Judge, pending writ

petitions, also allowed these operators to operate

and ordered to maintain temporary permits of such

operators. Now they also have an advantage of the

judgment of the learned Single Judge. Some of the

respondent-operators filed interlocutory

applications against the stay granted by this

Court while admitting the appeals.

6. Having considered the facts and

circumstances, we are of the view that the status

quo as on the disposal of the writ petitions will

have to be maintained with regard to the renewal

of the permits. Merely because the appeals are W.A.Nos. 780/2022 and conn.cases

preferred, status quo as on the date of disposal

of the writ petitions cannot be altered to the

peril of the operators based on the stay granted

by this Court.

7. We are, therefore, of the view that those

operators, who have valid permits as on the date

of the disposal of the writ petitions shall

continue to enjoy the temporary permits till

further orders are passed in these matters. The

applications for renewal, if any, shall be

considered accordingly. Thus, we modify the

earlier orders of stay granted in these matters,

as above.

List these cases for hearing on 23/5/2023.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE ms

12-04-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar