SURYA SANKARANARAYANAN Vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash Ext.P3 order passed by the 1st respondent whereby renewal of regular permit and replacement of vehicle was granted to the 3rd respondent and for other related reliefs.

(2.) Necessary facts for the disposal of the writ petition are thus; petitioner is an existing operator in respect of stage carriage No.KL-8 AN 2552 on the route Chemmanampathy - Ayyanthole via.Govindapuram, Kollengode, Nenmmara, Vadakkanchery, Vaniampara and Pattikkad as Limited Stop Ordinary Service (LSOS). The 3rd respondent had a regular permit to operate on the route Govindapuram - Guruvayoor in respect of stage carriage No.KL-8/Z.9119 and valid till

(3.) 9.2012. Even before the expiry of the regular permit, 3rd respondent defaulted operation and the vehicle was garaged and tax exemption was also sought. Subsequently, the vehicle was dismantled and scrapped and hence the same ceased to be in existence. 3. It is further contended that, 3rd respondent had thereafter filed a belated application for renewal and moved this court by filing W.P.(C) No.17499/2015 and secured Ext.P2 judgment, directing the application for renewal to be considered in the next meeting. Third respondent also filed an application for replacement and both the applications were considered simultaneously by the 1st respondent in the meeting held on 3.10.2015. Now, by Ext.P3 order, the renewal and replacement has been granted through a single order. According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 is unjustifiable and illegal in view of the fact that the application for renewal was submitted by the 3rd respondent by specifying the vehicle which was not in existence at the time of submission of the application for renewal. That apart it is urged that such application for renewal is not maintainable and such permits are not renewable in the light of the judgment rendered by this court in Usman v. Regional Transport Authority [2015 (4) KLT 25] and affirmed in Jaffer v. Usman [2015(4) KLT 590].