Partly allowed

Judy George v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Dec 2021WP(C)/26233/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition seeking mandamus to register a vehicle. The petitioner's re-registration application was informally rejected due to alleged alteration. The Court directed the respondents to pass formal orders after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the application and pass formal orders after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within six weeks.

Judy George Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

SATURDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 26233 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

JUDY GEORGE,AGED 47 YEARS,S/O ANTONY GEORGE, MOOLAKAD, CHETHIPUZHA, CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM-686 106.

¶8

BY ADVS. SARATHKUMAR.T.S SHYAM KUMAR M.P JISMEMOL JAMES ACHANKUNJU P.C

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECETARY, MOTOR VEHICLE DEPARTMENT, GOVT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-605001

¶11

2 THE JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CHANGANASSERY, REVENUE TOWER, CHANGANASSERY P.O.KOTTAYAM-686 101 SR GP SMT. MABLE C KURIAN

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

W.P(C) NO.26233 of 2021

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶17

“To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate order or diction commanding the respondents to register the vehicle of the petitioner with no.KA11CO537 in the RTO, Changanassery.”

¶18

The petitioner purchased a vehicle of which Ext P1 is the certificate of registration. Ext P2 is the NOC issued from the parent RTO. The petitioner submitted Ext P3 application before the 2^nd respondent seeking assignment of new registration mark. It appears that the request has not been acceded for the reason that there is alteration on the vehicle.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior Government Pleader.

¶20

No formal orders have been passed on Ext P3

¶21

application except for an endorsement suggesting that there is alteration and a consequential

¶22

rejection. The 2^nd respondent is to pass formal

¶23

W.P(C) NO.26233 of 2021

¶24

¶25

orders on the application after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶26

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext P3 application with due notice to and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Let orders be passed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN

JUDGE

vdv

W.P(C) NO.26233 of 2021

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26233/2021

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RC OF THE VEHICLE WITH NO KA11CO537 DATED 2.7.2021 Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOC ISSUED FROM THE MANDYA RTO DATED 3.8.2021 Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER SHOWING THE ENDORSEMENT OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 11.8.2021

Judy George v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Judy George 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Airport Golf View Hotels and Suites Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Sanjay H Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

V.Manoj, Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)

Johnson Payyappilly Vs the State of Kerala

Sabu Mathew Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

Linta Sabu Vs the Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)