JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER Vs. SATHIPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Respondent in W.P.(C) No. 35635 of 2010 has filed this writ appeal aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 21.12.2010.

(2.) The writ petition was filed by the Respondent herein. According to the Respondent, by Ext.P1 sale certificate, he purchased a Maruti Suzuki vehicle and made Ext.P3 application under Rule 95 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules'), for reservation of the fancy registration number, KL/56C-5656. The number was not allotted by the Appellant on the ground that there were two more applicants and that, therefore, auction in terms of Rule 95(4) of the Rules had to be conducted.

(3.) According to the Respondent, the other two applicants were ineligible to apply under Rule 95 of the Rules for the reason that they were not owners of vehicles and they were not even proposed purchasers of vehicles. On that premise he made a representation which was not responded by the Appellant. It was at that stage he filed the writ petition, praying for a writ of mandamus directing the Appellant herein to allot the registration number KL/56C-5656 to the Respondent for his vehicle covered by Ext.P1 sale certificate.