Disposed

Jibin Baby v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority,Idukki

Kerala HC1 Mar 2018WP(C)/5795/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a petition by a stage carriage holder challenging the requirement to produce a permit-less certificate for permit renewal, the Kerala High Court directed the respondent to consider the petitioner's pending clearance certificate application within one month, referencing a prior judgment on the absence of legal impediment.

What did the court decide?

The court directed the respondent to consider the representation for a clearance certificate within one month, taking note of the prior judgment in W.P.(C).No.1837/2017.

Jibin Baby Vs Secretary, Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶3

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶4

WP(C).No. 5795 of 2018

¶5

PETITIONER(S)

¶6

JIBIN BABY, S/O. BABY, KUTTIKKATTU HOUSE, KATTAPPANA P.O, IDUKKI.

¶7

BY ADV.SRI.I.DINESH MENON

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,IDUKKI -685 603.

¶10

BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.HARISH

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

¶13

WP(C).No. 5795 of 2018 (Y)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.1837/2017 DATED 15.02.2017. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR CLEARANCE CERTIFICATE. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.38809/2017 DATED 4.12.2017.

¶17

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS - NIL

/TRUE COPY/

PS TO JUDGE

03/03/2018

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.

¶23

----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.5795 of 2018

¶24

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2018

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

The petitioner, who is the holder of a regular permit on the route of Ernakulam South - Kuzhitholu in respect of a stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-06/H-3555, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to consider Ext.P3 request for clearance certificate in relation to the aforesaid stage carriage, without insisting for permit less certificate, to be obtained by him while applying for renewal of permit. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon Ext.P2 judgment of this Court dated 15.2.2017 in W.P. (C)No.1837 of 2017.

¶27

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶28

Paragraph 3 of Ext.P2 judgment of this Court dated 15.2.2017 in W.P.(C).No.1837 reads thus :

¶29

“3. The learned Government Pleader pointed out that the permitless certificate is insisted since the application for renewal of the permit in respect of the vehicle is pending. In other words, the stand of the respondent is that the petitioner is not entitled to transfer the vehicle during the pendency of the application for

¶30

W.P.(C)No.5795 of 2018

¶31

:-2-:

¶32

renewal of the permit. No provision in the Motor Vehicles Act empowering the Registering Authority to insist a permit-less certificate of the vehicle from the Regional Transport Authority concerned for effecting transfer in respect of a vehicle is brought to the notice of this Court. Likewise, no provision interdicting the sale of the vehicle during the pendency of an application for renewal of the permit issued in respect of the same is also brought to the notice of this Court. The question whether the petitioner is entitled to pursue the application for renewal without there being a vehicle is a matter for the Regional Transport Authority concerned to consider at the relevant point of time. So long as there is no legal impediment for the petitioner to sell his vehicle, the impugned order, to the extent it directs the petitioner to produce the permit-less certificate, is unsustainable. In the circumstances, the writ petition is allowed and the interim order passed by this Court on 20.01.2017 directing consideration of Exts.P2 and P2(a) applications without insisting the permit-less certificate is made absolute.”

¶33

Since Ext.P3 application submitted by the petitioner is pending consideration before the respondent, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said representation in accordance with law, taking note of Ext.P2 judgment. Necessary orders in this regard shall be passed, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of one month from

¶34

W.P.(C)No.5795 of 2018

¶35

:-3-:

¶36

the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment, with notice

¶37

to the petitioner.

¶38

Sd/ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶39

AV/1/3

Jibin Baby v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority,Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jibin Baby v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority,Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.v.Joseph Vs the Thodupuzha Co-Operaive Primary Agricultural & Rural Development Bank LTD.NO.4388

Jessan Vs Sepcial Sale Officer, Thrissur Sahakarana Karshika Grama Vikasan Bank

Santhosh.K.v Vs Malabar Regional Co-Operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. (Milma)

Anil Kumar P.P Vs the Kannur Town Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. C-844

M/S.Canara Bank Ltd. Vs Regional Transport Officer

Anup Kumar Vs the Excise Commissioner