Allowed

Steephan v. the Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC20 Feb 2024WP(C)/1645/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the Regional Transport Authority to consider the petitioner's pending applications for renewal of a regular permit and a temporary permit, ruling that the delay in filing did not justify non-consideration and ordering the Authority to act within two months.

What did the court decide?

The 1st respondent is directed to consider the regular permit renewal applications and the temporary permit application within two months.

Steephan Vs the Regional Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 1645 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

STEEPHAN
AGED 66 YEARS
S/O ANTHONY, PIDIYATH HOUSE, THALORE P.O,
THRISSUR, PIN – 630306

¶7

BY ADVS.
P.DEEPAK
NAZRIN BANU

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THRISSUR,
PIN – 680003

¶10

2THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, THRISSUR,
PIN – 680003

¶11

SRI.S.GOPINATHAN-SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

¶14

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

Dated this the 20^th day of February, 2024

¶17

The petitioner seeks to issue a writ of mandamus to command the 1^st respondent-Regional Transport Authority to pass final orders on the application for renewal of Ext.P1 Permit in compliance of Ext.P3 judgment of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in M.V.A.A. No.186 of 2017.

¶18

By Ext.P3 judgment, the State Transport

¶19

Appellate Tribunal has set aside Ext.P2 decision of the Regional Transport Authority revoking Ext.P1 Permit and further directed the Regional Transport Authority to consider and pass orders on the application for renewal of Ext.P1 Permit submitted by the petitioner.

¶20

The petitioner states that the petitioner was

¶21

running a Stage Carriage Permit on the route Kodungallur-

¶22

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶23

Mayannur as per Ext.P1 Permit. Ext.P1 Permit was valid till 17.04.2015. The application submitted by the petitioner for renewal was rejected on the ground that the vehicle covered by the Permit is in tax arrears. The petitioner filed M.V.A.A. No.186 of 2017 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal invoking Section 89 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside Ext.P2 decision of the Regional Transport Authority as per Ext.P3 order. After setting aside Ext.P2 decision, the Regional Transport Authority was directed to consider the application for renewal of Permit submitted by the petitioner within a period of two months and in the event of such application being allowed, the Regional Transport Authority was directed to consider the application for replacement of vehicle.

¶24

The grievance now projected by the petitioner is that the petitioner has submitted an application for

¶25

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶26

4

¶27

Temporary Permit, pending consideration the application for Regular Permit as directed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The said application for Temporary Permit is not being considered.

¶28

Senior Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. The 2^nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. In the counter affidavit, the 2^nd respondent has stated that the petitioner preferred appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the State Transport Appellate Tribunal by Ext.P3 judgment set aside the order under appeal, directing the Regional Transport Authority to reconsider the renewal application. The replacement application was also directed to be considered thereafter. The 2^nd respondent submitted that the application for renewal of Regular Permit will be considered as directed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in due course of

¶29

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶30

¶31

time.

¶32

The 2^nd respondent further submitted that for consideration of Ext.P6 application for Temporary Permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, even though the decision of the Regional Transport Authority revoking the Permit and rejecting the application for replacement was set aside by State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The renewal of Permit could be considered only from 17.04.2015 to 16.04.2020. Further renewal from 16.04.2020 cannot be considered, since there is no application for renewal of Permit submitted by the petitioner for that period. Therefore, the question of consideration of application for Temporary Permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act does not arise. Application for Temporary Permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act can be considered only when in cases where applications for renewal of Permit are filed within the period

¶33

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶34

¶35

prescribed under Section 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Hence, the petitioner’s application for Temporary Permit does not come under the purview of Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶36

7 . I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the respondents.

¶37

It is not disputed that the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of Regular Permit for the period from 17.04.2015 to 16.04.2020 is pending. The 2^nd respondent will object to application for Temporary Permit at this stage stating that there is no valid application for renewal of Regular Permit for the period subsequent to 16.04.2020. During the pendency of this writ petition, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 application for renewal of Regular Permit for the period beyond 16.04.2020. Therefore, ordinarily there cannot be any objection in considering the

¶38

¶39

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶40

Temporary Permit application.

¶41

The Senior Government Pleader would point out

¶42

that the application for further renewal of Regular Permit has been filed by the petitioner after more than four years and therefore it is hopelessly barred by limitation. Furthermore, the Stage Carriage of the petitioner was registered in the year 26.07.2000 and it has completed more than 20 years. That is also a reason, which may affect the consideration of the petitioner’s application, contended the Senior Government Pleader.

¶43

To the said argument, the counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the application for replacement of vehicle has also been made and the same is also pending.

¶44

It is not in dispute that an application for renewal of Regular Permit for the petitioner’s vehicle to conduct Stage Carriage service on the route Kodungallur-Mayannur, is still pending consideration before the Regional Transport

¶45

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶46

¶47

Authority, pursuant to the direction of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. As regards grant of Temporary Permit prayed for by the petitioner, at present the petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 application for renewal of Regular Permit after 16.04.2020. It is true that there is a delay in submitting that application. However, the petitioner has submitted an application for condonation of delay along with the said application. Therefore, the reason for non-consideration of the petitioner’s application for Temporary Permit does not exist any more.

¶48

The Senior Government Pleader would point out that in the facts of the case, the petitioner’s application for Temporary Permit cannot be considered under Section 87(1) (d) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶49

In this regard, the counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of this Court in Abdul Wahab v. Regional Transport Authority [2015 (4) KLT 268], wherein this Court

¶50

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶51

9

¶52

in somewhat similar circumstances held that the application submitted by the petitioner therein can be considered as one submitted under Section 87(1)(c) of the Act.

¶53

In the light of the afore facts and since the application for renewal of Regular Permit of the petitioner is pending consideration for the period from 17.04.2015 to 16.04.2020 and for the period from 18.04.2020 to 17.04.2025, the respondents are bound to consider those applications as well as the application for Temporary Permit submitted by the petitioner treating it as one filed under Section 87(1)(c) of the Act.

¶54

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 1^st respondent-Regional Transport Authority to consider the application for renewal of Regular Permit submitted by the petitioner for the period from 17.04.2015 to 16.04.2020 as also Ext.P7 application for renewal of Regular Permit in the ensuing Regional Transport Authority Board Meeting itself

¶55

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶56

¶57

positively or within a period of two months. Pending consideration of the said application, Ext.P6 application for grant of Temporary Permit shall be considered by the 2^nd respondent-Secretary Regional Transport Authority within a period of two months.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH

JUDGE

hmh

WP(C) NO.1645 OF 2024

¶63

¶64

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1645/2024

¶65

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶66

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE PETITIONER VALID TILL
17.04.2015 DATED 26.9.2013
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 05.04.2017
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE STAT
DATED 16.05.2019 IN MVAA NO: 186 OF
2017
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE QUERY DATED
27.10.2023 SUBMITTED UNDER THE RTI
ACT, 2005
Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
05.01.2024
Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 09.01.2024
Exhibit P7THE TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR
RENEWAL OF PERMIT DATED 08/02/2024
SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8A TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR
REPLACEMENT DATED 09/02/2024
Exhibit P9A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
15/01/2024 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P10A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 09/02/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Steephan v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Steephan v. the Regional Transport Authority

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

Kelu Maliyekkal Vs Kottakal Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd.

K.T.George, Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation

Sumi Thilakan Vs Authorised Officer

Mathai @ T.J. Mathew Vs Managing Director, Union Bank of India

Dr.Thampi Raj Vs the Branch Manager

Jabin K. Basheer Vs Regional Passport Officer Kochi