Disposed

Biju Sreedharan v. the Secretary Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC6 Sept 2016WP(C)/26820/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged refusal of fresh contract carriage permit application due to demand for financier No Objection Certificate. Court declined to follow Section 51(6) but directed respondent to consider application after petitioner submitted declaration under Section 51(8).

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to consider the permit application taking into account the declaration submitted by the petitioner within one month.

Biju Sreedharan Vs the Secretary Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016/15TH BHADRA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 26820 of 2016 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

BIJU SREEDHARAN AGED 41, S/O. SREEDHARAN, PAININGAL HOUSE, KAKKAD P.O., PIRAVOM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.M.JITHESH MENON SMT.K.INDU (POURNAMI)

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, MOOVATTUPUZHA, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, MOOVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661.

¶11

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-09-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 26820 of 2016 (B)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 27.5.2016.

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL -----------------------

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

dlk

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶22

W.P.(C) No.26820 of 2016

¶23

Dated this the 6^th day of September, 2016

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Petitioner is a registered owner of vehicle bearing No. KL

¶26

17 G 4109, which was issued with a contract carriage permit for a period of 5 years and the same had expired. Petitioner in the circumstances submitted a fresh application for contract carriage permit dated 25.5.2016. However, the same was refused to be considered, evident from Ext.P1 communication, directing the petitioner to produce No Objection Certificate of the financier.

¶27

According to the petitioner, Section 51(6) enunciating the production of No Objection Certificate, only for the consideration of the applications mentioned therein and as per Section 51(6) the production of a No Objection Certificate for the consideration of a fresh application for permit is not required.

¶28

However, it is an admitted fact that, the application is fresh, only so far as it concerns the petitioner alone, whereas the vehicle was holding a permit prior to the same.

¶29

W.P.(C) No.26820 of 2016

¶30

¶31

Therefore, in that view of the matter I do not think that the contention put forth by the petitioner with respect to the stipulation contained under Section 51(6) is correct. However, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner produced a declaration as contemplated under Section 51(8) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In that view of the matter I think it is only appropriate that a direction is issued to the respondent to consider the application submitted taking into account the declaration submitted during the pendency of this writ petition.

¶32

Therefore, there will be a direction to the first respondent to consider the application for permit and pass orders in accordance with Section 51(9), within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, in accordance with law and specifically resorting to the requirements of Section 51(9) of the Act.

¶33

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

SHAJI P. CHALY,JUDGE

¶36

dlk/6/9/

Biju Sreedharan v. the Secretary Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Sreedharan v. the Secretary Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kunjumol Vs Puthenchira Service Co-Operative Society

Noushad S. Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Prabhakaran .K. Vs the Secretary Regional Transport Authority

Muralidharan P.K. Vs N.Prasanth

K.G. Gopinathan Vs the Kjerala State Co-Operativew Employees Pension Board

Aneesh Vs the Secretary