PRABHAKARAN Vs. SECRETARY R T A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these cases are before me, since the State Transport Appellate Tribunal is not functioning. Petitioners challenge the various orders issued by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur. In certain cases, the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority has passed the following order:

(2.) Petitioners are aggrieved by various orders mentioned above, as well as the inaction on the part of the Secretary to pass orders on the various petitions filed by them for temporary permit. In certain cases, applications were submitted for temporary permit in the vacancy of another vehicle. Applications have also been preferred highlighting the temporary need due to Sabarimala Festival. In O.P. No. 21978of 1998, petitioner stated that the return of the application stating that the route applied for does not exist cannot be sustained. According to counsel, petitioner applied for a temporary permit on the route Kunnathangadi-Guruvayur, for which regular permit was already granted, which is valid up to 26.5.2002. Permit holder, however, surrendered the permit, and in that vacancy petitioner applied for temporary permit. According to him, since the need continues, Secretary ought to have considered his application for temporary permit.

(3.) S.87 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 deals with temporary permits. A Regional Transport Authority is given power to grant temporary permits without following the procedure laid down in S.80, for a limited period, which shall not in any case exceed four months in the following cases: