Allowed

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, v. Biju

Kerala HC9 Nov 2022WP(C)/11160/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of two writ petitions concerning a stage carriage permit dispute. The court held that the petitioner, holding regular and temporary permits, was entitled to ply the full route under the Nationalization Scheme. The challenge by the State Transport Corporation was rejected.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; respondents directed to issue regular permit for Piravom to Kaloor via Thiruvankulam as per the Scheme dated 21.02.2017.

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, Vs Biju — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 42623 OF 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

BIJU, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O KURIACKO KIZHAKKEKUNNEL HOUSE,EAST MORAKKALA KUMARAPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM.

¶8

BY ADV ALIAS M.CHERIAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY ERNAKULAM,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN 682 030 2 THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY , ERNAKULAM, PIN 682 030 3 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,FORT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, ERNAKULAM PIN 682 035. BY ADVS. SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN. P.C.SASIDHARAN SMT.RASHMI.K.M., SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).11160/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020

¶13

¶14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶15

PRESENT

¶16

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶17

WEDNESDAY, THE 9^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶18

WP(C) NO. 11160 OF 2020

¶19

PETITIONER:

¶20

KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.

¶21

BY ADVS. SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPN. P.C.SASIDHARAN

¶22

RESPONDENTS:

¶23

1 BIJU, S/O.KURIACKO, KIZHAKKEKUNNEL HOUSE, EAST MORAKKALA, KUMARAPURAM.P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN-690548.

¶24

2 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD.P.O., PIN-68030, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3 THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD.P.O., PIN-682030.

¶25

4 STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM, DISTRICT COURT COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM.P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN-682011.

¶26

BY ADV SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).42623/2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020 3

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

This order of mine shall dispose of two Writ Petitions, WP(C)No.11160 of 2020 (first writ petition) filed by the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation challenging the order dated 27.10.2018 of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowing the appeal of the first respondent and WP(C) No.42623 of 2018 (second writ petition) seeking the implementation of the same very order. Since the common question of fact and law are involved, these matters would be decided together.

¶31

The petitioner in the second Writ Petition and respondent No.1 in the first Writ Petition is the registered owner of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-07/AR-2777 operating on the route Piravom – Kaloor (via) Thiruvaniyoor, Sasthamugal and Thiruvankulam for the last 22 years as per the regular permit having validity of five years. The permit was issued originally in the year 1996, validating till 14.4.2016 and when the application for renewal was submitted, during its pendency, a complaint was filed by one Mr.Sabu.P.V. against the permit of the petitioner. Before convening the meeting, a decision was taken to renew the permit only for the route Piravom - Thiruvankulam on the ground that originally the permit in the year 1996 was issued for the said route

¶32

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020 4

¶33

and for the remaining route i.e. Thiruvankulam - Kaloor , a temporary permit was issued. The aforementioned decision was taken on 13.10.2017 vide Ext.P1. The aforementioned order was challenged by preferring an appeal bearing No.122 of 2017. When the appeal was pending, the petitioner was issued a temporary permit for the route Piravom - Kaloor as existed earlier. In the meantime, the Government came out with a Scheme,, as per Ext.P4 notification dated 21.02.2017, and on a question with regard to the services operated by the State Transport Undertaking to the exclusion of other persons or otherwise it was decided that besides the State Transport Undertaking, the existing regular permits in the private sector as on the date of publication of the Scheme in the Gazette will be allowed to operate and the temporary permits mentioned in the annexure will also be permitted to convert their permits as regular permits, but no fresh permits will be given. Keeping in view this fact, the Tribunal allowed the appeal and issued directions to the respondents. The complaint by Sabu P.V. was withdrawn, and the decision of the competent authority in not renewing the permit with regard to the route Thiruvankulam – Kaloor was set aside.

¶34

The aforementioned order as stated above has been

¶35

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020 5

¶36

challenged by the Kerala State Transport Corporation, Thiruvananthapuram on the ground that Biju, the first respondent in the first Writ Petition and petitioner in the second Writ Petition, did not have the regular permit for the stage carriage for the route Thiruvankulam - Kaloor during the year 1996 and had only a temporary permit as per the proviso to Section 104 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Scheme would not come to the rescue of the petitioner as it contain the annexure which do not reflect the name of the petitioner besides the other temporary permit holders. It is on that account the application for renewal of the permit vide item No.64 was rejected on 17.03.2018 which order has not been challenged ,thus,Biju is not entitled to ply from Piravom to Kaloor.

¶37

I have heard the counsel for the parties and appraised

¶38

the paper book.

¶39

It is a matter on record that the petitioner in the second Writ Petition and respondent No.1 in the first Writ Petition had been operating the vehicle bearing registration number KL-07/AR-2777 in the route Piravom – Kaloor via Thiruvankulam for the last 22 years and had been issued a regular permit. When it was renewed for the fifth time, was issued a regular permit for some part of the allotted route with a temporary permit from Thiruvankulam to

¶40

¶41

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020

¶42

Kaloor. However, in 20 06 temporary permit for the entire route was granted. An application was filed in 2016 for renewal and permit was renewed for Piravom – Thiruvankulam route, but for other route i.e., Thiruvankulam – Kaloor a temporary permit was issued. The aforementioned order was challenged by the petitioner and the State Transport Tribunal noticing the order of the Government promulgating the Scheme, allowed the same. It would be appropriate to extract the relevant portion of the Scheme :-

¶43

SC	HEME
Whether the services are to be operated by the State Transport Undertaking to the exclusion of other persons or otherwise.	Yes, the existing regular permits in the private sector as on the date of publication of the Scheme in the Gazette will be allowed to operate. The temporary permits in the Annexure will also be permitted to operate and they will be permitted to convert their permits as regular permits. No fresh permits shall be granted nor shall the existing permits varied in favour of any other operators enabling them to conduct service overlapping on the route as such or portion thereof. Services by other State Transport Undertakings at the neighbouring State can be operated in consultation with and after getting the no objection certificate from the State Transport Undertakings of Kerala.

HEME

Whether the services are to be
operated by the State Transport
Undertaking to the exclusion of
other persons or otherwise.

Yes, the existing regular permits in the private sector as
on the date of publication of the Scheme in the Gazette
will be allowed to operate. The temporary permits in the
Annexure will also be permitted to operate and they will
be permitted to convert their permits as regular permits.
No fresh permits shall be granted nor shall the existing
permits varied in favour of any other operators enabling
them to conduct service overlapping on the route as such
or portion thereof. Services by other State Transport
Undertakings at the neighbouring State can be operated in
consultation with and after getting the no objection
certificate from the State Transport Undertakings of
Kerala.

¶44

From the perusal of the extracted portion it is evident that the

¶45

existing permit holders and the temporary permit holders were permitted to ply along with the State Transport Undertaking. The ground that the name of the petitioner was not mentioned in Annexure would not sustain as it only reflects the temporary permit holders whereas the petitioner, for the majority of the route had

¶46

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020 7

¶47

the regular permit except for a shorter route. Once the permission was granted for both regular and temporary permit, there cannot be any impediment for the respondents to issue the permit to the petitioner to ply the vehicle for that Kerala State Road Transport Corporation cannot have any grievance.

¶48

For the reasons aforementioned, the order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal cannot be said to be suffering from any illegality and perversity. The same is upheld. The respondents are directed to issue regular permit for the route Piravom to Kaloor via Thiruvankulam as per the Scheme dated 21.02.2017.

¶49

¶50

Sd/- AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

¶51

csl

¶52

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020

¶53

¶54

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11160/2020

¶55

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶56

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.2.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MVAA NO.122 OF 2017. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶57

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEME OF NATIONALIZATION DATED 21.2.2017.

¶58

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN MVAA NO.122 OF 2017 BEFORE THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2018 IN MVAA NO.122 OF 2017 ON THE FILES OF STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.12.2018 IN OP(C)NO.3222 OF 2018. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R1-A TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.C2/12321/2016/E DATED 13/10/2017 EXHIBIT R1-B TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 31/8/2017 IN M.P.NO.673/2017 IN M.V.A.A.NO.122 OF 2017 EXHIBIT R1-C TRUE COPY TEMPORARY PERMIT NO.P.TEM.7/1572/2018 DATED 10/12/2018 EXHIBIT R1-D TYPED COPY OF JUDGEMENT DATED 27/10/2018

¶59

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020

¶60

¶61

IN M.V.A.A.NO.122/2017

¶62

EXHIBIT R1-E TYPED COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HELD ON 24/11/2018 SHOWING THE DECISION ON ADDITIONAL ITEM NO.2 RELATING TO THIS RESPONDENT

¶63

WP(C) Nos.42623/2018 & 11160/2020

¶64

¶65

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42623/2018

¶66

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶67

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO C2/12321/2016/E DATED 13.10.2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 31.8.2017 IN M.P.NO 673/2017 IN M.V.A.A.NO 122 OF 2017 PASSED BY THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2018 IN M.V.A.A.NO.122 OF 2017 STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF TEMPORARY PERMIT NO P.TEM 7/1572/2018 DATED 10.12.2018 IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF CASE STATUS OF WPC NO.42623/2018 FROM 28/12/2018 TILL 04/03/2022 DOWNLOADED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THIS HON'BLE COURT
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF CAUSE LIST-ADVOCATE WISE SEARCH FOR THE DAY 24/02/2022 IN RESPECT OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P7.	TRUE COPIES OF CAUSE LIST-ADVOCATE WISE SEARCH FOR THE DAY 04/03/2022 IN RESPECT OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit R2(a)	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDERR DATED 23.02.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R2(b)	TRUE COPY OF THE MVAA NO.122 OF 2017
Exhibit R2(c)	COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.3.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit R2(d)	COPY OF THE SCHEME OF NATIONALISATION DATED 21.2.2017

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, v. Biju

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, v. Biju

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

M/S.Malappuram Spinning Mills Ltd., Vs the Board of Trustees

P.K.Salimkumar Vs State of Kerala

Davis Samuel, Vs State of Kerala

Jancy Dominic Vs Union of India

Pradeepkumar P. S. Vs Kerala State Beverage (M and M) Corporation Ltd.

The Secretary Vs G.Sujeendran