Dismissed

Arjun.R v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jun 2016WP(C)/17486/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-issuance of interview call for a police post, claiming he held a valid heavy duty driving licence despite an expired period, arguing continuous validity per the Motor Vehicles Act. Court analyzed renewal rules and dismissed petition for lack of valid licence on application date.

What did the court decide?

None granted. Petitioner's application for interview directions dismissed.

Arjun.R Vs State of Kerala — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2016/13TH JYAISHTA, 1938H

¶5

WP(C).No. 17486 of 2016 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

ARJUN.R,

¶8

AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.LATE RAJAN, ARABHI, CHERAVALLY, KAYAMKULAM P.O, PIN- 690 502.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.D.SAJEEV (KAMBISSARI) SRI.K.T.SEBASTIAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695 001.

¶12

2. SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KAYAMKULAM- 680 502.

¶13

3. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN- 695 004.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, S.C

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

WP(C).No. 17486 of 2016 (I)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶20

P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION OF K.P.S.C WITH CATEGORY NO. 461/2010.

¶21

P2 TRUE COPY OF THE KPSC MEMO OF WITH FILE NO. UFR 1(1)11886/10/GW DATED 10-02-2016.

¶22

P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DRIVING LICENCE PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER

¶23

P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08-03-2016 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶24

P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 09-03-2016 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO.10215/2016 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶26

P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13-04-2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶27

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶33

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶34

WP(C).No.17486 of 2016-I.

¶35

= = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶36

Dated this the 3^rd day of June, 2016.

¶37

J U D G M E N T

¶38

The petitioner has applied for selection to the Kerala Public Service Commission for appointment to the post of Reserve Sub Inspector Trainee/Armed Police Sub Inspector pursuant to Ext.P1 notification dated 31.12.2010. The last date fixed for submission of applications was 9.2.2011. Ext.P1 stipulates that the applicants should possess a current heavy duty driving licence. The case of the petitioner is that he has passed the written examination conducted as part of the selection process and produced his certificates for verification. Nevertheless, according to him, the Public Service Commission is not inviting him for the interview on the ground that he did not possess a heavy duty driving licence as on the date of the notification. According to the petitioner, he was holding a heavy duty driving licence for the period from 22.12.2006 to 21.12.2009 and that the same was later renewed on 7.9.2011

¶39

¶40

WP(C).No.17486/2016-I.

¶41

and that therefore it has to be presumed that he was holding a heavy duty driving licence as on the date of notification. The petitioner, therefore, seeks, among others, directions to the third respondent to call him for interview pursuant to Ext.P1 notification.

¶42

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 as also the learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent.

¶43

Section 15(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act provides that any licensing authority may, on application made to it, renew a driving licence issued under the provisions of this Act with effect from the date of its expiry. The first proviso to Section 15(1) of the said Act lays down that in any case where the application for renewal of a licence is made more than thirty days after the date of its expiry, the driving licence shall be renewed with effect from the date of its renewal. Section 15(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act which deals with renewal of driving licence reads thus:

¶44

“Section 15. Renewal of driving licences :- (1): Any licensing authority may, on application made to it, renew a driving

¶45

WP(C).No.17486/2016-I.

¶46

¶47

licence issued under the provisions of this Act with effect from the date of its expiry:

¶48

Provided that in any case where the application for the renewal of a licence is made more than thirty days after the date of its expiry, the driving licence shall be renewed with effect from the date of its renewal:

¶49

Provided further that where the application is for the renewal of a licence to drive a transport vehicle or where in any other case the applicant has attained the age of forty years, the same shall be accompanied by a medical certificate in the same form and in the same manner as is referred to in sub-section (3) of section 8, and the provisions of sub-section (4) of section 8 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to every such case as they apply in relation to a learner's licence.”

¶50

It is evident from the aforesaid provision that if only an application for renewal of licence is submitted within thirty days from the date of expiry, the licence will be renewed with effect from the date of its expiry and that in all other cases, the licence will be renewed only from the date of application.

¶51

Ext.P3 is the driving licence particulars of the petitioner. Ext.P3 indicates that the petitioner was holding a heavy duty driving licence from 22.12.2006 to 21.12.2009. It also indicates that the said licence was renewed only on 7.9.2011. In other words, it is evident that the petitioner has

¶52

¶53

WP(C).No.17486/2016-I.

¶54

applied for renewal of licence far beyond thirty days from the date of its expiry. The said fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner also. It is thus evident that the petitioner was not having a valid driving licence as on the date of notification or on the last date fixed for submission of the application. In the said view of the matter, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶57

Kvs/-

¶58

// true copy //

Arjun.R v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun.R v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pazhanimala Vs State of Kerala

Karthikeyan Vs the Chairman

Reju Pulimoottil John Vs the Passport Officer

M/S.Mary Matha Construction Company Vs State of Kerala

Kodiyathu Kizhakke Veettil Lakshmi Amma Vs the District Collector

Shakkeena P. Vs the District Collector, Kozhikode