(1.) ORDER:-- Petitioner applied for grant of a regular permit to operate his vehicle on the route Guruvayu-Edappal. The route is an inter-district route traversing the districts of Malappuram and Thrissur. Major portion of the route lies within the jurisdiction of the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram which is the primary authority.
(2.) Petitioner offered readily vehicle No KL10/D1023 at the time of submitting his application and requested grant regular permit, subject to counter signature from the Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur, Ext.P 1 is the application dated 18-8-1998 submitted by the petitioner along with a covering letter detailing the necessity of the service proposed which was addressed to the; second respondent. Petitioner then received Ext. P2 a copy of the communication sent by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur, requesting him to obtain and forward the concurrence of the Regional Transport Authority Thrissur for the portion falls within the jurisdiction of that Regional Transport Authority for the grant of regular permit.
(3.) Petitioner is aggrieved by the said communication of the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram. Main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram is only an executive officer as stipulated in rule 122 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, and has no jurisdiction to make a request to the Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur for concurrence. According to the counsel it is only the Regional Transport Authority who can seek concurrence and not the Secretary, who is the delegated authority. Every application for a permit shall be made to the Regional Transport Authority of the region in which it is proposed to use the vehicle of vehicles. It the permit sought for is to be valid in other districts, the Regional Transport Authority, the primary Authority, has to obtain concurrence/counter signature form the sister authorities.