Kerala High Court
M.S. Premkumar vs State Of Kerala on 27 August, 2025
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 1 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
KERALA TAXI DRIVERS ORGANIZATION [ KTDO],
AGED 51 YEARS,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BAHULAYAN A.P,
S/O PARAMESWARAN, ROOM NO.1,/4899 T, C.H.CROSS
ROAD, EAST NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKKODE, RESIDING AT
AIKKARASSERY HOUSE, IRUNNILAMKODE P.O.,
MULLURKKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680583
BY ADVS. SHRI.ASOK KUMAR K.P.
SHRI.ABDUL HAMEED RAFI
SHRI.RAKESH S MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHAKKAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO. 391, 1ST FLOOR,
MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 2 2025:KER:65709
4 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHAKKAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).12378/2025, 15181/2025 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 3 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 12378 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 M.S. PREMKUMAR, AGED 70 YEARS,
S/O SANKARANKUTTY, MANAMMAL HOUSE, MSM TRANSPORT,
KONATHUKUNNU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680123
2 C.A. FRANCIS, AGED 65 YEARS,
S/O ANTHONY, CHALLISSERY HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKKARA,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680565
3 C.A. JOY, AGED 57 YEARS,
S/O ANTHONY, CHALLISSERY HOUSE, PERINGOTTUKKARA,
THRISSUR, PIN - 680565
BY ADVS. SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE
SHRI.K.T.RAVEENDRAN
SMT.AKSHARA K.P.
SMT.MEERA J. MENON
SMT.ARATHY P.S.
SMT.ANAGHA MANOJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 4 2025:KER:65709
COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO. 391, 1ST FLOOR,
MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
4 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 5 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 15181 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
HEADMASTER, PKMM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
EDARIKODE, P.O. EDARIKODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676501
BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.ANISON
SHRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN
SMT.P.A.RINUSA
SMT.ANNIE JACOB
SMT.DONA MARGRET P.R.
SMT.ANAGHA RENJITH V.R.
SMT.M.U.SOORYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY, TRANSPORT COMMISSINERATE,
VAZHUTHACAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
THIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676505
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 6 2025:KER:65709
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 7 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 15942 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
TRAVEL OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF KERALA (TOAK),
AGED 48 YEARS, REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. ARUN M.N., SAVITHA NIVAS, KACHAPILLY ROAD,
VYTILA, PIN - 682019
BY ADV SMT.S.SREEJA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO. 391, 1ST FLOOR,
MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNENT SECRETARIATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
4 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 8 2025:KER:65709
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 9 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 16924 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 UNAIDED SCHOOLS PROTECTION COUNCIL,
REG. NO. TVM/TC/139/2024,REPRESENTED BY ITS
GENERAL SECRETARY SRI. P.S. RAMACHANDRAN
PILLAI,ST: MARY'S RC SCHOOL, MUDAVANMUGAL,
KESARI NAGAR, ARAMADA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
RESIDING AT VAIRIYAMMURIYIL,PUTHENVEEDU,
VENMANI P.O., CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 689509
2 THE MANAGER, PADMASREE CENTRAL SCHOOL,
ENATH P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 691526
BY ADVS. SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR
SRI.SABU PULLAN
SRI.GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
SHRI.R.BHASKARA KRISHNAN
SHRI.BHARATH MOHAN
DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 10 2025:KER:65709
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SUYRA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 11 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 18217 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
JOMY DEVASSY, AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O DEVASSY KUTTY, MANJOORAN HOUSE,
ERUMATHALA P.O., CHUNANGAMVELY, ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 683113
BY ADV SHRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL
RESPONDENTS:
1 REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
2ND FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
THRIKKAKKARA PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY., PIN - 682030
2 THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, 2ND FLOOR,
CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,THRIKKAKKARA PO,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 682030
3 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUDE P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY., PIN - 695014
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 12 2025:KER:65709
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 13 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 19647 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 JASMINE T.J., AGED 39 YEARS,
W/O FIRSHAN FRANCIS XAVIER, KURISHINKAL HOUSE,
CHELLANAM, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682008
2 LEYA JOSEPH, AGED 45 YEARS,
W/O GEORGE, PUTHANPURAKKAL HOUSE,
MATTANCHERRY TOWN, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682002
3 NAJEEB K.A., AGED 58 YEARS,
S/O ABDUL MAJEED, KENAL HOUSE, KAMBIVELIKKAKAM,
VAZHAKKALA, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
4 BALAKRISHNAN K.S., AGED 59 YEARS,
S/O SREEDHARAN, KURUVATH HOUSE, PAULS APARTMENTS,
RMV ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682026
5 RAJESH K.R., AGED 40 YEARS,
S/O K.K. RAJAN, KAMBIVELIKKAKATH HOUSE,
CHELLANAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682008
6 HARIS M. PALACKAL, AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O MUHAMMED, PALACKAL, PALLILAMKARA,
HMT COLONY,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683503
BY ADV SMT.NAZRIN BANU
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 14 2025:KER:65709
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF
TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT SECRETARY,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO. 391,
1 ST FLOOR, MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
4 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE,
VAZHUTHACAUD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 15 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 19931 OF 2025
PETITIONERS:
1 MALAPPURAM DISTRICT BUS OPERATORS ORGANIZATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,M.C. KUNHIPPA,
S/O BEEYUTTY, AGED 49 YEARS,STAR COMPLEX,
NEW BUS STAND, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676501
2 MUSTHAFA KULATHUPADEEKAL, AGED 63 YEARS,
S/O HAMZA,KULATHUPADEEKAL HOUSE, CHANDAKKUM P.O.,
NILAMBUR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 679329
3 SIVASANKARAN V.P., AGED 66 YEARS,
S/O PARANGODAN,VALIYAPARACKAL HOUSE,
EDARIKODE P.O.,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676501
BY ADV SHRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO.391, 1 ST FLOOR,
MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,TRANSPORT
COMMISIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695014
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 16 2025:KER:65709
3 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695014
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 17 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 22700 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
PAKEEZA KUNHIPPA, AGED 64 YEARS,
S/O KOMUKUTTY HAJI , GENERAL SECRETARY,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS
ASSOCIATION, STAR TOWER NEAR NEW BUS STAND,
PANDIKKAD ROAD MANJERI, RESIDING KARAKUNNU,
MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676123
BY ADV SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUDE P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PIN - 695014
2 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
MOTOR VEHICLE DEPARTMENT, TRANS TOWER,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY ,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CIVIL STATION,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676121
4 THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION,
MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676121
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 18 2025:KER:65709
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 19 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 22767 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
LAWRENCE BABU, AGED 62 YEARS,
S/O, LAWRENCE,GENERAL SECRETARY, (REG NO.
161/84),THE QUILON DISTRICT PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS
ASSOCIATION, ANANDAVALLEESWARAM, KOLLAM, RESIDING
SIJODALE, MANGAD, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691015
BY ADV SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUDE P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PIN - 695014
2 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
MOTOR VEHICLE DEPARTMENT, TRANS TOWER,
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014
3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CIVIL STATION,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
4 THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 20 2025:KER:65709
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 21 2025:KER:65709
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 27th DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 5TH BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 25842 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
BIBIN T.ALAPPAT, AGED 45 YEARS,
S/O.THOMAS, ALAPPATT HOUSE, PURANATTUKARA,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680551
BY ADV SHRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, ROOM NO.391, 1ST FLOOR,
MAIN BLOCK, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001
2 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT
COMMISIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695014
3 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695014
4 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003
BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 22 2025:KER:65709
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 13.08.2025, ALONG WITH WP(C).17429/2025 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 27.08.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 23 2025:KER:65709
C.R
JUDGMENT
[WP(C) Nos.17429/2025, 12378/2025, 15181/2025, 15942/2025, 16924/2025,
18217/2025, 19647/2025, 19931/2025, 22700/2025, 22767/2025, 25842/2025]
In this batch of writ petitions, W.P.(C) Nos. 17429, 19931,
25842, 22767, 22700, 19647, 18217, 15942, 15181, 16924 and 12378 of
2025, the petitioners, who are stage carriage operators, tourist taxi
operators and educational institution bus operators, challenge the
decisions of the State Transport Authority (hereinafter, "STA")
dated 24.01.2025 and the circular of Transport Commissioner dated
28.04.2025 mandating the installation of cameras with driver-
fatigue detection sensors, production of Police Clearance Certificate
(PCC) and the installation of geo-fencing facility. Since common
questions of fact and law arise for consideration, these writ
petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this
common judgment.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 24 2025:KER:65709
2. The petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos. 19931, 25842, 19647,
12378 of 2025 are aggrieved by the decision of the STA taken on
24.01.2025, by which three conditions were stipulated and made
applicable to existing stage carriages with effect from 01.04.2025.
These included: (i) production of police clearance certificates by the
registered owner, driver, and conductor; (ii) installation of cameras
with driver-fatigue detection sensors; and (iii) geo-fencing facility
with a recorder. The petitioners essentially contend that this
decision was taken without affording notice or an opportunity of
hearing to any of the stakeholders. It is pointed out that the agenda
for the meeting published on 09.01.2025 contained 20 items
concerning renewal and variation of inter-state permits. However,
on 23.01.2025, an additional agenda was prepared introducing
departmental item No.3, without prior notice, for consideration of
proposals relating to 503 formulated routes. While granting the
formulated routes, it was decided that 14 permit conditions would
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 25 2025:KER:65709
apply to such routes. The STA further incorporated Condition
No.15, making conditions 1, 4, and 8 applicable to existing stage
carriages with effect from 01.04.2025.
2.1. The petitioners also urge that the impugned action is
in clear violation of Rules 123 and 140 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles
Rule, which indicates that a notice has to be issued to those who are
permitted to attend the meeting to make a representation. It is
further submitted that under Section 68(3) of the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988, the power to frame rules vests exclusively with the State
Government, and not with the STA. The conditions prescribed by
the Government for the control of transport vehicles, and the
authorities, while granting permits, may impose conditions only to
the extent permitted by the statute. Under Section 72(2) of the
Motor Vehicles Act, an authority may impose any of the 22 specified
conditions, but under sub-rule (xxii), any variation of existing
conditions or imposition of additional conditions can be effected
only after giving notice to the permit holder of not less than one
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 26 2025:KER:65709
month. The petitioners contend that this mandatory procedure has
not been followed.
2.2. Pursuant to the STA's decision, the Transport
Commissioner issued a circular dated 28.04.2025, directing that
police clearance certificates be obtained for drivers, conductors,
and door assistants as a condition for working in stage carriages. It
is contended that such insistence is arbitrary and beyond the
powers conferred under the Act. The petitioners also highlight the
operational difficulties, pointing out that the insistence on PCC
would create an acute scarcity of employees.
2.3. Apart from the common contentions in W.P.(C)
No.19931 of 2025, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri. K.V.
Gopinathan Nair argues that the circular issued by the Transport
Commissioner requires the production of a PCC and receipt
regarding the remittance of contribution to the Welfare Fund,
which is impossible to perform in the usual course, and as a result,
the operation of the stage carriage itself will become interrupted.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 27 2025:KER:65709
There are services operating in which the Motor Transport Workers
Fund is not applied since the Provident Fund scheme covers certain
firms. The circular of the Transport Commissioner was also issued
without affording opportunity to the affected parties and without
any application of mind. The Learned Counsel further argued that
the subject matter in WP(C) No. 25842/2025 is a notice dated
22.05.2025 issued by RTO based on the decision of the STA and
circular by the Transport Commissioner, insisting on the
production of PCC in respect of the permit holder as well as workers
for the purpose of accepting statutory application with the
intimation that no service will be provided on non-production of
the same, is highly arbitrary, improper and without any authority
of law.
2.4. In W.P.(C) No.19647 of 2025, apart from the above
contentions, Smt. Nazrin Banu, learned counsel for the petitioners,
argued that the impugned decision is vitiated for want of notice,
relying on the judgment of this Court in Mohammed v. R.T.O
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 28 2025:KER:65709
Malappuram [1992 (2) KLT 781]. It is further submitted that the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules,
1989, already provide a complete statutory scheme governing the
grant, renewal, disqualification, and revocation of drivers' and
conductors' licences. Sections 19 and 31 to 34 of the Act, read with
Rules 6, 7, 10, 14, 22, 49, 58, 66 and 67 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles
Rules, contemplate the circumstances under which a license may be
refused or revoked, the procedure to be followed, the requirement
of affording an opportunity of hearing, and the availability of
statutory appeals. In particular, Section 19 of the Act and Section 34
with Rule 67 of the Rules mandate that disqualification can be
ordered only after recording reasons in writing and hearing the
affected person.
2.5. In view of this elaborate framework, it is contended
that the insistence on production of police clearance certificates
through the above decisions amounts to an extraneous condition
which overrides and supplants the statutory scheme, thereby
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 29 2025:KER:65709
debarring licensed drivers and conductors from employment in
stage carriages without any procedure or hearing. It is thus argued
that the STA has no power at all to impose such conditions, and that
the concerns now projected are already statutorily addressed under
Section 72 of the Act and the allied Rules. The impugned orders,
having been issued without notice, hearing, or statutory authority,
are therefore illegal and unsustainable. The petitioners also
contend that there are practical difficulties in the insistence on
police clearance certificates, as even mere involvement in
proceedings, without any conviction, is treated as a disqualification,
which directly infringes the fundamental right to carry on an
occupation under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and cannot be
justified as a reasonable restriction. It is further urged that civil
disputes are often converted into criminal proceedings, and the
circular itself recognises that certain categories, such as boundary
disputes, family matters, or cheque cases, are excluded, thereby
highlighting the unprincipled and selective nature of the
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 30 2025:KER:65709
prescription. The condition, it is argued, amounts to executive
legislation in clear contravention of the Motor Vehicles Act and the
Rules. Apart from being ultra vires, the insistence on PCCs creates
grave practical difficulties. Operators are compelled to periodically
obtain certificates for every driver, conductor, and door attendant,
even though the validity of a PCC is typically limited to six months.
This, the petitioners submit, imposes an unworkable burden and
substantially increases operational costs, thereby rendering
compliance virtually impossible.
2.6. In W.P.(C) No.12378 of 2025, Sri. Rilgin V. George, apart
from adopting the above contentions, argued that the stakeholders
who will be vitally affected by the decision of the STA were not
heard at all. He also relies on the judgment of this Court in Premlal
v. Government of Kerala [2004 (3) KLT 48] to say that the action of
the STA is totally without authority.
2.7. In W.P.(C) No.15181 of 2025, filed by the Headmaster of
an Educational Institution, he complains about the direction to
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 31 2025:KER:65709
install the cameras. It is also contended that the affected parties
were not heard before passing the impugned decision.
2.8. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Sajeev
Kumar K. Gopal in W.P.(C) No.18217 of 2025 argues that Rule 153
and 153A of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules take care of the
situation, and the present directions of the STA are not required
and in fact conflict with the statutory scheme.
2.9. The learned counsel appearing in W.P.(C) No.22700 of
2025 and W.P.(C) No.22767 of 2025, Sri. O.D. Sivadas also argued the
lack of power and that the decisions were taken without hearing
the affected parties.
2.10. Accordingly, the petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.19931,
19647 and 25842 of 2025 seek to quash the STA decision dated
24.01.2025, while in W.P.(C) No.25842 of 2025 there is also a
challenge to the Transport Commissioner's circular dated
28.04.2025 and the consequential notice dated 22.05.2025 issued by
the RTO insisting upon production of PCC for acceptance of
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 32 2025:KER:65709
statutory applications. The petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos. 22700 and
22767 of 2025 seek a declaration that the insistence on PCC as a
condition for submitting applications for permits is unsustainable.
3. Opposing the writ petitions, the learned Senior
Government Pleader Smt.Surya Binoy argues that the STA has
ample power as seen from Section 68 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The
argument that stakeholders were not heard also cannot be accepted
as the insistence on PCC is on the driver, the conductor those
employed and not on the owners of the stage carriage and in the
absence of any one of them who is likely to be affected by the
decisions of the STA maintaining a challenge, the plea of lack of
notice put forth by the owners of the stage carriages cannot be
entertained.
3.1. It is further argued that though the Government has
the power under Section 67 of the Act, Section 68(3) gives power to
the STA to take the decisions impugned in the writ petition. It is
argued that all the decisions are made in the public interest and for
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 33 2025:KER:65709
the public. It is further argued that the petitioner got sufficient
time, as the impugned decision was taken in the month of January
2025, to take such steps to comply with the directions of the STA. It
is also argued that the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules give ample
power to the Transport Authorities to impose the conditions now
introduced through the impugned orders. It is further submitted
that the reasonableness and proportionality of the measures put in
place by the impugned decision have to be examined from the
perspective of the safety and convenience of the travelling public.
The purpose, intent, and object of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, and
the Rules thereunder are to promote the safety, well-being, and
hassle-free commute for the travelling public. It is not to be
examined based on the inconvenience, if any, caused to operators of
the contract carriages/stage carriages. STA's decision was
prompted by a significant rise in incidents involving road accidents
attributed to driver negligence, rash driving, and increasing reports
of harassment against students. The impugned decision, being like a
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 34 2025:KER:65709
policy measure, is not amenable to judicial review except in cases
where they are manifestly violative of any statutory provisions or
the fundamental rights.
3.2. The learned Senior Government Pleader also relied on
the judgments in Calicut Islamic R.H.S School v. STA [2004 KHC 807],
Surinder Singh v. Central Government and Others [1986 (4) SCC 667],
Uttam T. Dhumal & Others v. Regional Transport Authority, Pune &
Others [2002 SCC Online Bom 803], The Kerala State Private Bus
Operators' Federation & Ors. v. The Transport Commissioner & Ors
[W.P.(C) No.36842 of 2023 dated 11.11.2024], Kerala Bus Transport
Association and another v. State of Kerala and another [W.A. No.2030
of 2024 dated 20.012.2024], Subhash Chandra and Others v. State of
U.P. and Others [1980 KHC 639], Kasaragod District Bus Owners
Association v. Regional Transport Authority [2015 (1) KHC 156],
Raghavan v. R.T.O. Kollam [2001 (2) KLT 209], Sukumaran E.S and
Others v. State of Kerala and Others [2006 KHC 3742], Union of India
and Another v. Cynamide India Ltd. and Others [1987 KHC 982], M.K
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 35 2025:KER:65709
Aravindakshan v. Regional Transport Officer & Others [WP(C)
No.27379/2013 dated 05.02.2015]. On the above grounds, it is prayed
that the writ petitions be dismissed.
4. Heard Sri. K.V. Gopinathan Nair, Sri.Nazrin Banu,
Sri.Rilgin V. George, Sri. Prasad Chandran, Sri.Sajeev Kumar K.
Gopal, Sri.O.D Sivadas, Sri. Asok Kumar K.P., Smt. S. Sreeja, Sri. P.
Mohandas for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government
Pleader, Smt. Surya Binoy and Sreejith V.S.
5. The primary issue raised is regarding the powers of the
STA to insist that the permit holders of the stage carriages are to
install cameras with driver fatigue detection sensors, enable a geo-
fencing facility with a recorder, and obtain police clearance
certificates for registered owners, drivers, and conductors. Yet
another issue is the power of the Transport Commissioner to issue a
circular clarifying the requirement of a police clearance certificate.
6. About the issue raised by petitioners on camera
installation in the stage carriages, contract carriages and
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 36 2025:KER:65709
educational buses, it is averred in the counter affidavit filed by the
2nd respondent that the requirement of installing three surveillance
cameras, at the front, rear, and interior of all educational
institution buses, which was initially made effective from 01.04.2025
pursuant to the decision of the State Transport Authority dated
24.01.2025, was subsequently extended taking note of the objections
raised in the meeting held on 30.05.2025. All stakeholders, including
representatives of unaided schools and school vehicle operators,
were invited and allowed to express their concerns at the above-
mentioned STA meeting. The directions were finalised only after
such consultation. Accordingly, the said requirement was directed
to take effect only from 01.08.2025. From this date onwards, this
mandate will become part of the certificate of fitness and bus
permit conditions. Vehicles failing to comply with these
requirements shall not be eligible for mandatory fitness
certification or valid permit issuance.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 37 2025:KER:65709
7. It is further stated that in W.P.(C) No.17429 of 2025,
wherein the sole relief sought by the petitioner was to keep in
abeyance the Ext.P4 order mandating the installation of cameras for
a period of six months. The STA, by its decision dated 30.05.2025,
extended the time for compliance up to 10.10.2025. Likewise, in
W.P.(C) No.15942 of 2025, the relief sought was identical, namely, to
keep in abeyance the said order for six months to enable the
installation of cameras. This Court, in W.P.(C) No. 37758 of 2023 and
W.A. No. 2030 of 2024 arising therefrom, considered the question
whether, in the absence of any enabling provision under the Motor
Vehicles Rules, 1989, directions could be issued for the installation
of CCTV cameras and related facilities, and upheld the validity of
such directions. Therefore, the relief sought by the petitioners
concerning the installation of cameras stands covered against them
by the aforesaid decision, and the challenge has to be rejected.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 38 2025:KER:65709
8. As regards the contention of the petitioners that the
permit holders were not heard or consulted in the matter before
issuing the impugned circulars, the said argument has to be
rejected for more reasons than one. In the first place, it has to be
noticed that in a matter of policy or introducing regulatory
measures, the petitioners need not be heard at all. Rule 123 and
Rule 140 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules only require notice to
persons who are reasonably likely to be affected by the issues under
consideration, in the opinion of the transport authorities, and only
those who have a right to be heard are entitled to make
representations under Rule 128. The permit holders have no right
of representation against regulatory measures/policy decisions
issued in the public interest, as the stakeholders who are affected
and interested in the measures under question are the public at
large and the travelling public in particular. The decision of the
Supreme Court in Union of India and Another v. Cynamide India Ltd.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 39 2025:KER:65709
and Others [1987 KHC 982], paragraph 7, is relevant and is extracted
hereunder.
"7. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx We also wish to clear a
misapprehension which appears to prevail in certain
circles that price-fixation affects the manufacturer or
producer primarily, and therefore fairness requires that
he be given an opportunity and that fair opportunity to
the manufacturer or producer must be read into the
procedure for price-fixation. We do not agree with the
basic premise that price fixation primarily affects
manufacturers and producers. Those who are most
vitally affected are the consumer public. It is for their
protection that price-fixation is resorted to and any
increase in price affects them as seriously as any
decrease does a manufacturer, if not more."
9. A reading of the principles laid down by the Supreme
Court in the above case shows that, while introducing a policy,
regulatory measures, or in the exercise of subordinate legislation, it
is not necessary to afford a hearing to the affected parties.
10. As regards the power of STA to issue the impugned
circular, the relevant provisions of Sections 67 and 68 of the Motor
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 40 2025:KER:65709
Vehicles Act, 1988, extracted below, need consideration..
"67. Power of State Government to control road transport.
--(1) A State Government, having regard to--
(a) the advantages offered to the public, trade and
industry by the development of motor transport,
(b) the desirability of co-ordinating road and rail
transport,
(c) the desirability of preventing the deterioration of the
road system; and
xxxxxxxxxx
[(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the
State Government may, by notification in the Official
Gazette, modify any permit issued under this Act or make
schemes for the transportation of goods and passengers
and issue licenses under such scheme for the promotion
of development and efficiency in transportation -
(a) last mile connectivity;
(b) rural transport;
(c) reducing traffic congestion;
(d) improving urban transport;
(e) safety of road users;
xxxxxxxxxxxx
(k) improvement of the quality of life;
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
68. Transport Authorities.--(1) The State Government
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 41 2025:KER:65709
shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute for
the State a State Transport Authority to exercise and
discharge the powers and functions specified in sub-
section (3), and shall in like manner constitute Regional
Transport Authorities to exercise and discharge
throughout such areas (in this Chapter referred to as
regions) as may be specified in the notification, in respect
of each Regional Transport Authority; the powers and
functions conferred by or under this Chapter on such
Authorities:
PROVIDED that in the Union territories, the
Administrator may abstain from constituting any
Regional Transport Authority.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(3) The State Transport Authority and every Regional
Transport Authority shall give effect to any directions
issued under section 67 and the State Transport
Authority shall, subject to such directions and save as
otherwise provided by or under this Act, exercise and
discharge throughout the State the following powers and
functions, namely:--
(a) to co-ordinate and regulate the activities and policies
of the Regional Transport Authorities, if any, of the State;
xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[(ca) Government to formulate routes for plying stage
carriages; and]
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 42 2025:KER:65709
(d) to discharge such other functions as may be
prescribed.
(4) For the purpose of exercising and discharging the
powers and functions specified in sub-section (3), a State
Transport Authority may, subject to such conditions as
may be prescribed, issue directions to any Regional
Transport Authority, and the Regional Transport
Authority shall, in a discharge of its functions under this
Act, give effect to and be guided by such directions.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
10.1. There is no doubt that Section 67 grants the
government the authority to address the matters outlined therein.
This power vested in the State Government under Section 67
operates independently of the powers conferred upon the State
Transport Authority (STA) under Section 68(3). Specifically, Section
68(3) empowers the STA to regulate the activities and policies of the
Regional Transport Authorities (RTA). Section 68(3) envisions a
decision-making process, with decisions made by the STA qualifying
as policy decisions. These policies encompass regulatory measures
issued in the public interest, aimed at fostering uniformity and
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 43 2025:KER:65709
certainty in the implementation of powers of RTA. Furthermore,
Section 67 does not limit the authority of the STA as described in
Section 68. Rather, Section 68 signifies that the powers of the State
Government and those of the STA are intended to coexist, with the
latter being subordinate to the former. The phrase "subject to
rules" carries significant weight in this context.
10.2. As held by the Supreme Court in Surinder Singh
(supra), the framing of the rules is not a condition precedent to the
exercise of the powers expressly and unconditionally conferred by
the statute, and the expression 'subject to Rules' can only mean in
accordance with the rules, if any. Identical contention was
considered by the Bombay High Court in Uttam T. Dhumal & Others
(supra), wherein a decision of the STA to restrict the plying of 6 plus
1 seater autorickshaw outside all Municipal Corporation areas was
challenged. The Single Judge therein held that even in the absence
of any orders issued by the State Government, the STA is not
powerless to issue the orders therein, and the entire policy of
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 44 2025:KER:65709
Section 68(3) is the need or desire to provide for a uniform policy
for an area or areas in public interest. Section 68(3) also indicates,
by providing 'save as otherwise provided by the Act', that the
measures are not in conflict with the provisions of the Act and
Rules.
10.3. The contention that the power to frame rules for
providing the in-built security measures lies only with the Central
Government and not with the State Government was considered in
W.P.(C) No.36842 of 2023 and connected matters. The learned Single
Judge found that the State had the power to maintain law and order
and to safeguard the safety and security of the passengers, and the
writ petitions were dismissed and the same was affirmed in Writ
Appeal No.2030/2024, as under:
"We are sanguine of the fact that the State, independent
of the powers conferred under the provisions of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules,
1989, can issue directives to maintain the law and order of
the State. It is the duty of the State to maintain and
protect every citizen and to ensure their safety. The power
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 45 2025:KER:65709
of the State to issue directives to safeguard the interest of
the citizen is recognised under Article 162 of the
Constitution of India, and is also not inconsistent with the
object of the Motor Vehicles Act. In such circumstances,
the appellants cannot contend that unless the said power
is traceable to the specific provisions under the Central
Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, the same cannot be sustained.
We cannot remain oblivious of the laudable intent, which
is sought to be achieved by the State by issuance of these
directives. At the same time, we cannot shut our eyes to
the various instances that have cropped across the Nation
touching upon the safety of the women passengers and
also the unfortunate incidents, which have come to light
while travelling in stage carriages. The impugned
directives can only be viewed as a preventive measure to
thwart any possible crime against women and children."
[Kerala State Private Bus Operators' Federation v.
Transport Commissioner."
10.4. Thus, the power and competency of the Road
Transport Authorities were considered and answered separately,
besides the issue of consultation with the stakeholders. In view of
the above, the measures now put in place are certainly in exercise
of the powers conferred under the Act and not otherwise.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 46 2025:KER:65709
10.5. Chapter V of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, deals with
the Control of Transport Vehicles, while Section 66 lays down the
necessity of permits. Section 72 deals with the procedure to be
followed by the Regional Transport Authorities while granting a
permit. Section 72 (xxiv) lays down the power to impose other
conditions as may be prescribed. The Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules,
1989, were promulgated by the State of Kerala in exercise of the
rule-making powers inter alia conferred by Section 96 of the same
Chapter.
10.6. Rule 153 and 153(A) provides the following:
"153. It shall be a condition of the permit of every
transport vehicle, that the holder thereof-
(1) Shall ensure that the vehicle is driven only by a driver
duly authorised in this behalf by the Act and the rules
issued thereunder,
(2) shall exercise effective supervision over the work of all
his employees to ensure operation of the vehicle in
conformity with the Act and the rules issued there under;
(3) shall be responsible for the conduct of the driver and
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 47 2025:KER:65709
other employees; and
(4) shall not use the vehicle or cause or allow it to be used
in the commission of any offence under the Indian Penal
Code or any local or special law or any statutory control
order, for the time being in force
[(5) shall display the name, age, address and contact
numbers driver in white colour along with his photograph
inside the vehicle at a prominent place]
[153A. Permit holder to furnish details of the persons
employed in his stage carriage-Every holder of a stage
carriage permit shall furnish to the authority issuing the
permit up-to-date details regarding the name, address,
designation and duties of the persons employed by him in
the said stage carriage."
10.7. Thus, Rule 153 shows that the permit holders are to
exercise control and assume responsibility for the conduct of the
employees and conformity with the Act and Rules in the operations
of the vehicle, and the conduct of the employees certainly takes
within its fold the consideration of their criminal antecedents as
well. That apart, Chapter II and III of the Kerala Motor Vehicles
Rules, 1989, in particular Rule 10, shows that while granting a
license to a driver in respect of the transport vehicle, the Licensing
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 48 2025:KER:65709
Authority is to make such enquiries as may be reasonably necessary
to establish the identity of the applicant and to ascertain whether
the applicant is disqualified or liable to be disqualified for holding
or obtaining a driving license to drive a transport vehicle. Chapter
III also deals with licensing and conduct, and the duties of
conductors and stage carriages. Rule 58 again requires the authority
to make enquiries to establish the identity of the applicant and to
ascertain that the applicant is not disqualified or liable to be
disqualified for holding or obtaining the conductors' license.
10.8. It was held by the Karnataka High Court in its
judgment dated 10.11.2016 in W.P. No.30917/2016, construing the
provisions of Sections 9 and 19 of the Act that the grant and refusal
to grant and the revocation of a license is dependent upon the
antecedents of the driver, and hence, before a license is granted to a
driver and even thereafter, a police verification can be carried out.
The Court considered a challenge to Rule 10(h) of the Karnataka On-
Demand and Transportation Technology Aggregators Rules, 2016,
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 49 2025:KER:65709
which required the drivers engaged by the Aggregators to obtain
police clearance as discriminatory. The Karnataka High Court held
that this requirement is already embedded in the Act in respect of
all driving licenses. Thus, it could be seen that the impugned
measures are only to ensure periodical monitoring and compliance
with the aforementioned rules.
10.9. The requirement of police verification of the
antecedents cannot be said to be antithetical to the scheme in the
Act or the Rules. Far from that, the instrumentalities of the State
would be neglecting their statutory duties if they did not hold the
permit holders responsible for ensuring the conformity of their
operations with the laws of the land. The phrase, 'any other
conditions, as may be prescribed,' has been interpreted widely and
with great latitude by the Supreme Court. In Subhash Chandra and
Others (supra), interpreting the same term, the Supreme Court held
that the imposition of any condition, of course, having a nexus with
the statutory purpose, has to be upheld as it is undeniable with
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 50 2025:KER:65709
human safety in one such purpose. The State's neglect in the area of
policing public transport was held to be deplorable, but when it
does so by prescribing a condition, the Court cannot be persuaded
into little legalism and harmful negativism.
10.10. The argument on behalf of the petitioner that a
liberalised regime is introduced by the Act and therefore, the
impugned measures will militate against the said regime is liable to
be repelled. The measures are admittedly aimed at public interest,
and when pitted against public interest, the right, if any, accorded
to individual permit holders must give way. The potential of heavy
vehicles to cause peril to the travelling public has already been
taken note of by this Court when it considered the requirement of
speed governors in its decision in Sukumaran E.S. and Others
(supra).
10.11. As regards the last contention that the Transport
Commissioner could not have issued the circular, Rule 405 of the
Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 takes care of the situation. The
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 51 2025:KER:65709
judgment of this Court in M.K. Aravindakshan (Supra) is also on that
aspect. As held by this Court in Kasaragod District Bus Owners
Association (Supra), the RTA has general powers to issue such
stipulations with respect to stage carriages and other vehicles while
granting permissions under the Act, even in the absence of a rule to
that end coined by the State Government. It is also found that the
RTA has to take into consideration the safety of the public in
imposing such specifications.
10.12. As regards the judgment in Mohammed (Supra) cited
on behalf of the petitioners, it dealt with the power of the Regional
Transport Authority to vary the conditions of the permit, which
could have been done only with notice to the party. Likewise, in
Premlal (Supra), this Court found that once permits have been
granted, the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority was not
justified in withholding them merely because the routes were being
formulated by the State Government under Section 68(3)(ca) of the
Act. These judgments in no way hold that the STA does not have the
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 52 2025:KER:65709
power to come up with measures like the one impugned in the writ
petition. Similarly, the judgment in Premlal (supra), which rightly
held that the permits cannot be issued beyond the scope of the Act
and Rules, also cannot be applied to a case where the impugned
measures were issued invoking the powers under the Act and Rules.
11. It is also to be noted that these measures were introduced
in January 2025, and sufficient time was given for implementation.
Given the above, based on the statutory provisions and the
judgments of in Uttam T. Dhumal & Others, Calicut Islamic R.H.S
School, Surinder Singh, The Kerala State Private Bus Operators'
Federation & Ors. (Supra) and it's Writ Appeal Kerala Bus Transport
Association and another (Supra) and Raghavan (Supra), the STA had
ample power to come up with the measures suggested in the orders
impugned, and the argument on lack of power is only to be rejected.
12. In a State where there were 1017 numbers of accidents
involving the stage carriages between 2023 to 2025 and more of
them being reported almost every other day, measures introduced
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 53 2025:KER:65709
by the State to curb or reduce such incidents are not only in
conformity with the Act and its Rules, but are also rooted in public
interest. Such measures cannot be stultified on the strength of
hyper-technical arguments. The impugned orders are lawful and
perfectly in line with the Act and Rules.
Accordingly, the writ petitions fail and are accordingly
dismissed.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
DMR/-
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 54 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12378/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMITS ISSUED TO 1ST
PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMITS ISSUED TO 2ND
PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 RUE COPY OF THE PERMITS ISSUED TO 3RD
PETITIONER
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPIES OF THE TAX INVOICES OF IST
PETITIONER
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPIES OF THE TAX INVOICES OF 2ND
PETITIONER
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPIES OF THE TAX INVOICES OF 3RD
PETITIONER
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER DATED 16.02.2023
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE STA
DATED 24.01.2025 IN DEPARTMENTAL ITEM
NO: 3
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA PUBLISHED ON
09.01.2025
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL AGENDA
DATED 23.01.2025
Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN WA NO.
2030/2024 DATED 20-12-2024
Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.
C1/57/2023/TC DATED 08/02/2025
RESPONDENTS'
ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF DECISION OF THE STA DATED
30.05.2025
ANNEXURE R2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF ATTENDEES.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 55 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15181/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/2452/2015 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
05.03.2022.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/15212/2018 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
31.05.2023.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL 2022-
CC-4984E ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
13.07.2022.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1699/2019 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
06.06.2024.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1772/2019 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
06.06.2024.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1760/2019 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
06.06.2024.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1366/2017 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED 1 .
6.2022.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1190/2018 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
21.04.2023.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1463/2015 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
15.02.2022.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 56 2025:KER:65709
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1413/2016 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
07.02.2022.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1446/2016 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
07.02.2022.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/3447/2018 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
03.11.2023.
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1502/2019 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
30.05.2024.
Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1163/2018 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
21.04.2023.
Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/1097/2015 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
23.02.2022.
Exhibit P16 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL 2022-
CC-7294F ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
29.08.2022.
Exhibit P17 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/83/2019 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
20.01.2024.
Exhibit P18 TRUE COPY OF THE THE BUS PERMIT NO. KL
6565/2080/2018 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO DATED
13.07.2023.
ExhibitP19 TRUE COPY OF THE BUS PERMIT NO
K16565/1365/2017 ISSUED BY THE TRANSPORT
DEPARTMENT, THIRURANGADI SRTO
Exhibit P20 P20: TRUE COPY OF LETTER
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 57 2025:KER:65709
NO.C1/57/2023/TC DATED 08.02.2025 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P21 TRUE COPY OF LETTERNO.E2//8/2025-TC
DATED 18.02.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P22 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.1/109153/2023
DATED 16.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P23 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
28.03.2025 IN W.P.(C)NO.12378/2025
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
Annexure R2(a) THE TRUE COPY OF THE STA ORDER DATED
30.05.2025
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 58 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15942/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE MEETING
OF STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY HELD ON
24.01.2025 AT THE TRANSPORT
COMMSISSIONERATE, THIRUVANATHAPURAM,
KERALA
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL AGENDA -II -
BASED ON D1/884/2024-TC DATED 22/01/2025
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERNAL DIRECTION HAS
BEEN ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.4 TO
ALL RTOS.
Exhibit P4 LIST OF MEMBERS OF THE PETITIONER
ASSOCIATION
RESPONDENTS'
ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF DECISION OF THE STA DATED
30.05.2025
ANNEXURE R2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF THE ATTENDEES.
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 59 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16924/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit -P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.
D1/884/2024-TC DATED 22-01-2025 ISSUED
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MEETING HELD
ON 24-01-2025
Exhibit -P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO.
E2/8/2025-TC DATED 18-02-2025 ISSUED BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Exhibit -P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
SPECIAL ENQUIRY REPORT REGARDING FIRE
DAMAGE SUSTAINED TO THE EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTION BUS HAVING REG. NO. KL-30E-
4886 SUBMITTED BY THE INSPECTION
COMMITTEE DATED 20-06-2024
Exhibit -P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS
HON'BLE COURT DATED 11-04-2025 IN W.P.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
Exhbit R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE STA
DATED 30.05.2025
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 60 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18217/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
IN FORM P.TEM A
Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION THROUGH
E-MAIL FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 07-05-2025
Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT DATED 23-01-2025 IN
DEPARTMENTAL ITEM NO.3
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 61 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19647/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 1. TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE 2ND PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE 3RD PETITIONER
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE 4TH PETITIONER
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE 5TH PETITIONER
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 24.01.2025 IN
DEPARTMENTAL ITEM NO. 3 (RELEVANT PAGES
ONLY)
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA DATED
09.01.2025
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL AGENDA
DATED 18.01.2025
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA DATED
22.01.2025
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA DATED
23.01.2025
Exhibit P11 A TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 12/25
DATED 28.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
22.05.2025 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR
ALONG WITH TYPED COPY
Exhibit P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 20.05.2025
Exhibit P14 31. A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 24.05.2025
Exhibit P15 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
16.02.2023 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 62 2025:KER:65709
CIRCULATING THE ABOVE DECISION FOR ITS
ENFORCEMENT
Exhibit P16 A TRUE OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED
11.11.2024 IN W.P.(C) 36842 OF 2023 AND
W.P.(C) 37758 OF 2023
Exhibit P17 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
20.12.2024 IN WRIT APPEAL NO. 2030 OF
Exhibit P18 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED
31.10.2023 SUBMITTED BY PRIVATE STAGE
CARRIAGE OPERATORS
Exhibit P19 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2025
IN WRIT PETITION NO. 12378 OF 2025 ON
THE FILES OF HIS HON'BLE COURT
Exhibit P20 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 30.05.2025
(RELEVANT PAGES ONLY)
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 63 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19931/2025
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS
Exhibit.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT IN
RESPECT OF KL-71/J 9001
Exhibit.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT IN
RESPECT OF KL-56/N 9606
Exhibit.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF
THE DECISION OF THE 2 ND RESPONDENT IN
DEPARTMENTAL ITEMS DATED 24.01.2025
Exhibit.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO: 12/2025
ISSUED BY THE 3 RD RESPONDENT DATED
28.04.2025
Exhibit.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
16.05.2025
Exhibit.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
28.03.2025 IN W.P(C) NO: 12378 OF 2025
Exhibit.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WP(C) 12378/2025 DATED
22.05.2025
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
Annexure R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED
30-05-2025
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 64 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22700/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE
AGENDA ALONG WITH THE DECISION OF THE
STA, THIRUVANANHAPRUAM HELD ON
23.01.2025
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 12/2025
DATED 28.04.2025 ISSUED BY 2ND
RESPONDENT
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 65 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22767/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE
AGENDA ALONG WITH THE DECISION OF THE
STA, THIRUVANANHAPRUAM HELD ON
23.01.2025
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 12/2025
DATED 28.04.2025 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 66 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25842/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT DATED
13.10.2020 VALID TILL 13.9.2015
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT DATED
8.1.2021, VALID TILL 19.10.2025
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF
THE DECISION OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN
DEPARTMENTAL ITEMS DATED 24.01.2025
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO: 12/2025
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
28.04.2025
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PRIVATE BUS OPERATORS
ASSOCIATION DATED 16.05.2025
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.5.2025
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
Annexure R2(a) TRUE COPY OF DECISION OF THE STA DATED
30.05.2025
Annexure R2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF THE ATTENDEES
WP(C) NO. 17429 OF 2025
& connected cases 67 2025:KER:65709
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17429/2025
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P- 1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
REGISTRATION DATED 12.06.2018
Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE MEETING
OF STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY HELD ON
24.01.2025 AT THE TRANSPORT
COMMISSIONERATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL AGENDA II
DATED 22.01.2025 APPROVED BY THE JOINT
TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO
STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
Exhibit P-4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION
CONTAINING THE ABOVE DIRECTION BEARING
NO.E2/8/2025-TC DATED 18.02.2025
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
Annexure R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE STA ORDER DATED
30.05.2025
