K A NIZAR Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, an ex-service man, was operating a stage carriage bearing registration No.KL 07 AN 6430 on the route Vytilla- Vytilla on the strength of a regular permit. THE last of the renewals was valid upto 6.1.2011. THE petitioner did not apply for renewal within the stipulated time, viz., 15 days before the expiry of the permit. He however submitted an application for renewal on 7.1.2011 only after the expiry of the permit along with an application to condone the delay in applying for renewal. He also submitted an application for a temporary permit. He thereafter moved this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.1717 of 2011 seeking expeditious disposal of the application for temporary permit. By Ext.P5 judgment delivered on 18.1.2011, I disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam to consider the application for temporary permit, if it has been received and is pending, expeditiously and at any rate, within one week from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of the said judgment before the respondent. Pursuant to the said direction, the second respondent passed Ext.P6 order rejecting the application for temporary permit on the ground that the application for renewal of regular permit was not made in time. It is stated that being aggrieved by Ext.P6 order, the petitioner has filed M.V.A.A.No.27 of 2011 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and the same is pending consideration. It is further stated that in a similar situation, a learned single Judge of this Court has by Ext.P7 judgment delivered on 19.1.2006 in W.P.(C) No.1016 of 2006, directed consideration of the application for regular permit in accordance with law, and therefore, the first respondent may be directed to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 application for renewal of the permit, ignoring the findings and observations in Ext.P6.

(2.) I heard Sri.Babu Karukapadath, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.A.Asif, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. The pleadings disclose that the validity of the regular permit expired on 6.1.2011. The petitioner applied for renewal of the regular permit on the very next day. Though the petitioner was bound to file an application 15 days before the expiry of the permit, sub-section (3) of section 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act empowers the Regional Transport Authority to condone the delay, if sufficient cause is shown. The petitioner has along with Ext.P3 application for renewal of the permit filed an application to condone the delay in submitting the application for renewal. He has also enclosed along with it a copy of the medical certificate to show that he was laid up and therefore he was disabled from filing the renewal application in time. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the first respondent should consider Ext.P3 application and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 application for renewal of permit and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within six weeks from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment before the first respondent.