Thursday, 07, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Samuel C.P vs The Regional Transport Authority, ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 4494 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 4494 Ker
Judgement Date : 6 February, 2024

Kerala High Court

Samuel C.P vs The Regional Transport Authority, ... on 6 February, 2024

Author: N.Nagaresh

Bench: N.Nagaresh

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
         TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
                          WP(C) NO. 4372 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

              SAMUEL C.P
              AGED 50 YEARS
              S/O PAPPACHAN CHAMBAKOTTUKUDY HOUSE,
              THRIKKARIYOOR P.O AYAKKAD,
              KOTHAMANGALAM, PIN - 686692

              BY ADV K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR


RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
              IDUKKI
              REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY
              IDUKKI, PIN - 685603
     2        THE SECRETARY
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI,
              PIN - 685603

              SRI.SREEJITH V.S-GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.4372 OF 2024
                                  2




                        JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6th day of February, 2024

The petitioner is the holder of a Regular Permit to

operate service on the route Aluva-Kattappana. The Permit

was issued in the year 1987 and renewed from time to time

and valid up to 15.10.2015. The petitioner's applications for

renewal of Permit as well as replacement of vehicle have

been rejected by the 1st respondent by Ext.P2.

2. Aggrieved by Ext.P2, the petitioner filed statutory

appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal as

M.V.A.A.No.255 of 2023. In the appeal, Tribunal passed

Ext.P3 order validating the Permit enabling the petitioner to

operate the service on the above said route by virtue of

Temporary Permit for a period of two months. WP(C) NO.4372 OF 2024

3. Ext.P3 order has been subsequently extended for

a further period of two months as per Ext.P4. The 2nd

respondent has not complied with the order of the Tribunal,

as if the 1st respondent directed him to reject the application

in spite of the order of the Tribunal. The 2nd respondent is

duty bound to implement Ext.P4 order of the Tribunal

promptly and to issue the same in compliance with the order

of the Tribunal, contends the petitioner.

4. Government Pleader entered appearance on

behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The

Government Pleader argued that Ext.P3 order passed by the

State Transport Appellate Tribunal in M.P.No.2494 of 2023

in M.V.A.A.No.285 of 2023 on 30.10.2023 is illegal and

unsustainable. The Tribunal ought not have directed to

validate the Regular Permit of the petitioner. Aggrieved by

Exts.P3 and P4, the respondents are preferring a review

petition before the Tribunal, which will be taken up at any WP(C) NO.4372 OF 2024

time. After disposal of the Review Petition, necessary

endorsement will be made subject to the orders to be

passed by the Tribunal in the Review Petition.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Government Pleader representing the

respondents.

6. Exts.P3 and P4 are the interim orders passed by

the State Transport Appellate Tribunal directing to validate

the Regular Permit for a limited period, pending disposal of

the appeals. As long as these orders stand, the 1 st

respondent-Regional Transport Authority will have to

validate the interim orders. Filing of a review petition by itself

cannot be a reason not to validate the Permit.

In the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent-Secretary, Regional Transport

Authority to validate the Regular Permit of the petitioner as

directed by the Tribunal in Exts.P3 and P4, within a period of WP(C) NO.4372 OF 2024

one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

It is made clear that such validation will be strictly subject to

the outcome of the review, which may be preferred by the

respondents.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh WP(C) NO.4372 OF 2024

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4372/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER DATED NIL Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.08.2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN M.P NO 2494/2023 IN M.V.A.A 285/2023 DATED 30.10.2023 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER EXTENDING EXHIBIT.P3 ORDER FOR A FURTHER PERIOD

INM.P.2494/2023 IN M.V.A.A 285/2023 DATED 15.01.2024 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.01.2024

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter