J U D G M E N T

Shaffique,J The writ petitioner is the appellant who challenges the judgment dated 23/09/2014 in W.P.C.No.23203/2014.

2. The short facts involved in the writ petition would disclose that the petitioner purchased a vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-20-G-252, a Maruti Omni E MPI STD BSIV which was classified as LMV-private service vehicle as per certificate of registration issued by the competent authority. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 application dated 14/08/2014 for re-classifying the description of the vehicle as “Omni Bus for private use”. Since no action has been taken in the matter, he has approached this Court. Petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the learned Single Judge inFr.Pious v. Sub Regional Transport Officer [2002(3) KLT 965] to contend that reclassification is possible.

3. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgment, dismissed the writ petition on a finding that such reclassification is not possible.

4. Impugning the above judgment, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that in so far as a private service vehicle comes within the description of transport vehicle, it needs permit to operate and there are certain other restrictions as well. The p