BENNY PATHROSE Vs. TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER TRIVANDRUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has purchased a goods vehicle Mahindra Bolero Camper DXB52 2WD 3014 WB. He has submitted Ext.P3 application before the third respondent for alteration of the said vehicle. THE request of the petitioner is for conversion of the same as a passenger vehicle. THE said application was considered and Ext.P5 order was passed thereon, whereby the request of the petitioner for conversion of the same as a passenger vehicle was rejected. THE contention of the petitioner is that it is unsustainable in the light of Exts.P4 and P6 judgments. He has submitted Ext.P4 judgment along with Ext.P3 application. THE same was not properly considered. That apart, Ext.P6 judgment was passed in an identical matter. It is in the light of Exts.P4 and P6 judgments that the petitioner contends that Ext.P5 order requires re-consideration. Obviously, in Ext.P5, there is nothing which would suggest that the matter was considered in the light of Ext.P4. In the circumstances, to enable the third respondent to consider Ext.P3 in the light of Exts.P4 and P6 judgments, Ext.P5 is set aside. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to consider Ext.P3 afresh in the light of Exts.P4 and P6 judgments with notice to the petitioner. This Writ Petition is disposed of as above.