Kerala High Court
M.N.Vinitha vs The Regional Transport Authority on 22 October, 2025
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 1 2025:KER:78376
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
WEDNESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF OCTOBER 2025 / 30TH ASWINA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
M.N.VINITHA, AGED 58 YEARS,
W/O. MOHANAN, NIVEDYAM, CHOVVA.P.O.,
KANNUR. PIN, PIN - 670006
BY ADV SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
PIN - 670002
2 THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
CIVIL STATION, KANNUR, PIN - 670002
ADDL.R3 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY
ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN 695 014
(ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 22.10.2025 IN I.A No.1/2025)
SMT. SURYA BINOY, SR. GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 22.10.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 2 2025:KER:78376
JUDGMENT
The petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order passed by the Regional
Transport Authority, Kannur, on 20.02.2024, rejecting the
application for a fresh regular stage carriage permit applied for by
the petitioner. The petitioner had made Ext.P1 application, in
which Ext.P2 field enquiry report was made available, which
contains the following remarks.
"Major portion of the route proposed for this fresh permit
is passing through rural remote places and settled
farmers centre too, towards Iritty, the Taluk headquarters
and Kannur the district head quarters. Bus travelling
facilities is generally very rare through the proposed
route at present. Main business centre, Hospital facilities,
higher educational institutions, Govt. offices are only
available at Iritty and Kannur townships. Promotion of
bus services through this proposed route definitely much
useful to the traveling public and students. The route
portion Mele Chovva to Kannur Civil Station Jn. 3 km lies
on NH and the notified route sector which is within the
permissible limit of Govt. notification of the scheme of
nationalization.
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 3 2025:KER:78376
The application may be considered accordingly
accounting the public interest."
2. The application of the petitioner was adjourned by Ext.P3
proceedings, which was challenged again by filing W.P.(C) No.15616
of 2023, which was disposed of by judgment dated 02.06.2023
directing the passing of orders in the application in accordance
with law, taking into account Ext.P2 report and all subsequent
materials on record.
3. Through Ext.P5, the application was rejected on 19.07.2023,
which was challenged by the petitioner before the State Transport
Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam, in M.V.A.R.P No.170 of 2023. In the
revision, it is found that the Government had wrongly relied on the
scheme and that the reason in the impugned decision was not legal.
Accordingly, the impugned order therein was set aside, and the
first respondent was directed to reconsider the request of the
petitioner in the light of the observations made in the order.
4. The impugned order Ext.P7 was passed on 20.02.2024,
holding as follows.
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 4 2025:KER:78376
"5. As per proposal timings more trips are provided on
the route Iritty-Kannur, which is a well served area.
From the above facts, the primary preference of the
applicant is to conduct service on the well served sectors
between Iritty-Mattannur-Kannur. This may lead to
severe and undesirable competition among the fellow
operators and may result in traffic congestion and
accidents, jeopardising the safety and convenience of the
general pubic. For the above reasons, the above
application for temporary permit and fresh permit is
rejected."
5. The reasoning in Ext.P7 appears to be that the preference
of the petitioner was to conduct service on the well-served sectors
between Iritty-Mattannur-Kannur, which may lead to severe and
undesirable competition among the fellow operators and may
result in traffic congestion and accidents, jeopardising the safety
and convenience of the general public.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the said
finding in Ext.P7 is contrary to Ext.P2 field enquiry report. He also
argues that the Tribunal, in the first instance, had elaborately
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 5 2025:KER:78376
considered and found that the earlier rejection was bad and
therefore the correctness of Ext.P7 order must be tested in this writ
petition. It cannot be disputed that the petitioner has an alternate,
efficacious, statutory remedy against Ext.P7 rejection. The finding
in Ext.P7 turns on facts.
7. Under such circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise
the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
consider the legality of Ext.P7 order, which the petitioner can raise
before the Tribunal concerned. Without prejudice to any of the
contentions raised by the petitioner and without prejudice to his
right to move the Tribunal, this writ petition is closed.
8. The time spent between 18.06.2024 and this day shall be
excluded for the purpose of counting the period of limitation.
Since the application of the petitioner was filed in the year 2023
and as he has already approached this Court and the Tribunal
earlier, there will be a direction to the Tribunal to pass orders on
the appeal to be preferred by the petitioner within two months
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 6 2025:KER:78376
from the filing of the same by the petitioner. There will be a
further direction to the petitioner to file the appeal within ten days
from today. All the contentions of the petitioner are left open.
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
JUDGE
DMR/-
WP(C) NO. 21930 OF 2024 7 2025:KER:78376
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21930/2024
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGULAR
PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ENQUIRY REPORT
OF THE FILED OFFICER OBTAINED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 7.03.2023
Exhibit P4 . THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.
15616/2023 DATED 02/06/2023
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE RTA
DATED 19/07/2023
Exhibit p6 THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MVARP NO.
170/2023 DATED 15/01/2024 OF THE LEARNED
TRIBUNAL
Exhibit P7 THE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE RTA
DATED 20/02/2024
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
