A SUNIL RAJ Vs. SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the stage carriage operator who was conducting services on the route Palamukku- Palakkad Via-Ayaloor, Kaippancherry, Nemmara, Koodalloor, Pallavoor-Kakkayur and Koduvayur on the strength of a regular permit with stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-09/K-34. Though the petitioner's permit had expired, he did not apply for renewal of the same within the prescribed time. However, later on he has applied for renewal with a petition for condonation of the delay. The same is pending consideration of the Regional Transport Authority.

(2.) IN the above circumstances, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P4, an application for the issue of a temporary permit under Section 87(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act' for short). The petitioner complains that his application for temporary permit has not been considered till date.

(3.) IT is the specific case of the petitioner that Ext.P4 is an application submitted under Section 87(1)(c) of the Act. If so, the said application can be considered irrespective of whether an application for renewal submitted by the petitioner is pending or not. The issue of temporary permit under Section 87(1)(c) would have to depend on an assessment as to whether there is a temporary need in existence. Apart from making such an inquiry, no other consideration is necessary to be taken into account while considering an application under Section 87(1)(c). The decision reported in 2012 (2) KHC 317 (supra) does not refer to the consideration of an application under Section 87(1)(c). Therefore, there cannot be any doubt regarding the proposition that Ext.P4 application would have to be considered by the respondent, if there is a temporary need in existence. Therefore, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed without further delay.