Kerala High Court
Vijayalakshmi Sunil vs The Regional Transport Authority on 5 April, 2024
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 13808 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
VIJAYALAKSHMI SUNIL
AGED 46 YEARS
W/O SUNIL, PUTHIYERI CHITTEZHATH HOUSE,
ANNALLOOR P.O, TRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680731
BY ADV KIROSH RAJAN PONNAMBIL
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOLE P.O,
TRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
2 THE SECRETARY
THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, COLLECTORATE
AYYANTHOLE P.O TRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER-TRISSUR
OFFICE AT CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE P.O
TRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
BY ADV SRI.SREEJITH V.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.13808 of 2024
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 5th day of April, 2024
The petitioner is the registered owner of two buses
bearing registration Nos.KL-06D-5124 and KL-06C-6599
respectively.
2. The bus bearing registration No.KL-06C-6599 was
having a valid permit to operate on the route SN Puram-
Irinjalakuda-Chalakudy. The Regular Permit of the said bus
was valid till 11.10.2021 and therefore the petitioner had
submitted Ext.P1 application for renewal of permit on
18.09.2021. Due to Covid-19 Pandemic and allied restrictions,
there happened a delay in considering Ext.P1 application and
in the meantime, as the buses could not ply on the route, the
bus bearing registration No.KL-06C-6599 became unfit to
operate on the road.
3. The petitioner on 24.12.2022 submitted Ext.P3
application for replacement of the vehicle i.e. to replace bus
bearing No.KL-06C-6599 with bus bearing No.KL-06D-5124.
The 1st respondent had granted Ext.P1 permit for renewal of
application by Ext.P4 decision letter dated 25.08.2023. But the
1st respondent didn't consider Ext.P3 vehicle replacement
application relying on the judgment of this Court in Usman v.
RTA Malappuram & another (W.P.(C) No. 24250 of 2015) that
the applications for renewal of permit and replacement cannot
be considered simultaneously.
4. The respondents had another meeting on
05.01.2024. But then also, Ext.P3 application was not
considered. Hence, the petitioner had submitted Ext.P5
representation to the 3rd respondent to consider Ext.P3
application without further delay. But, no action is forthcoming.
In the circumstances, direction of this Court is sought for
directing the 3rd respondent or any other appropriate authority
to consider and dispose of Ext.P5 representation filed by the
petitioner without delay.
5. Government Pleader submits that the petitioner
had applied for renewal of permit as well as replacement of
vehicle. The renewal of permit has been granted. The
application for replacement can be considered only after
renewal of permit. Now, the application will be placed in the
RTA meeting in due course of time.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader representing the
respondents.
7. Taking into consideration the afore facts and taking
into consideration the fact that the petitioner's application for
replacement of vehicle is of a statutory nature, I am of the
view that the respondents shall consider the same
expeditiously and within a reasonable time.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the
1st respondent-Regional Transport Authority to consider
Exts.P3 and P5 applications in the next RTA meeting itself.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
spk
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13808/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT RENEWAL
APPLICATION DATED 18-9-2021
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION OF NON USE
OF BUS DATED 22-12-2022
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
REPLACEMENT OF VEHICLE DATED 24-12-
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION LETTER DATED
25-8-2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
6-2-2024
