Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2162
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
N. NAGARESH, J
XAVIER C.G. – Appellant
Versus
THE SECRETARY – Respondent
WP(C) 16310/2024
The Regional Transport Authority must consider applications for permit timing revisions within a reasonable time frame as mandated by statutory rules.
Headnote:
Revision - Transport Permit - Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules - Rule 145(7) - The court emphasized the statutory duty of the authority to consider applications for revision of timings under motor vehicle rules, supporting the need for timely decisions on permit adjustments.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Stage Carriage permit holder, sought to revise the timings of services on a specified route due to new services and changes post-issuance of permits. An application for this revision was submitted but not considered by the relevant authority, prompting the petitioner to file a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court established that there is a statutory obligation for the authority to review the revision application submitted by the petitioner. It highlighted failures in evoking timely consideration and set a period for the authority to respond appropriately.
Issues: Whether the Regional Transport Authority is required to consider the application for revision of timings under the provisions of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the respondent has a statutory duty to consider timely revision requests as per Rule 145(7) of the Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules, as supported by established case law.
Final Decision: The court directed the regional transport authority to consider the timing revision application within three months.
Dated this the 23rd day of April, 2024 The petitioner is a senior regular Stage Carriage permit holder operating on the route Andhakaranazhy – Thaickal – Cherthala – Kanichukulangara, operating now with Stage Carriage No.KL-24/C-7182. The timings of the service was last issued on 05.02.2002 which was replaced to the earlier vehicle No.KL-4/K-3749.
2. Several services have been introduced through this route and also covering major portions of the route after the issue of permit to the petitioner. There were also revision of timings and also surrender of several permits of other Stage Carriages serving on this portion of the route.
According to Rule 145(7) of Kerala Motor Vehicle Rules coupled with the Division Bench rulings in Krishnankutty v. John [ 1992(2) KLT 883 ] and Joji Edattel Vs. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority [ 2004(1) KLT 493 ], this Court found that these all are the grounds to apply in the matter of revision of timings. There is a statutory duty cast upon the respondent authority to consider the said request but the same is not considered.
3. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application for revision of timing. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent to consider the application for revision of timings.
4. Government Pleader submits that the Chief Electoral Officer has issued a communication No.EL8/2/2024-ELEC dated 20.03.2024 directing that the Regional Transport Authority Board meetings and the process of issue of Permits and convening of the time conferences should be deferred till the election process is over.
5. Heard.
6. It is evident that Ext.P2 is an application for change of timing which has statutory support. Therefore, it is necessary that the competent authority considers Ext.P2 in accordance with law, within a reasonable time, taking into consideration the communication dated 20.03.2024 of the Chief Electoral Officer also.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondent-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority to consider Ext.P2 application submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision thereon, within a period of three months in accordance with law and after giving opportunity of hearing to the affected parties.
