Transfer applications for permits cannot be processed without prior renewal of original permits as per statutory provisions.

JUDGMENT

The question that arises for consideration in these writ petitions is whether the applications submitted for transfer of the permits can be considered pending orders on the applications for renewal of the regular permit.

2. The stage carriages bearing registration Nos.KL-3N995 and KL-5R-4977 are covered by regular permits issued to the transferor, as seen from Ext.P1 produced in the writ petitions. Following the expiry of the permits on 9.8.2020 and 25-02-2020, respectively, the permit holders filed renewal applications, which are currently pending consideration with the Regional Transport Authorities concerned. The vehicles are now being operated on the temporary permits issued under Section 87 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1970, as seen from Ext.P2. As per Ext.P3 decision of the first respondent, the consideration of the renewal application was deferred as the question regarding overlapping on the route in question was being considered was decided that till a final decision is taken on the issue, temporary permits are to be issued to the expired permits.

3. The petitioners, along with the permit holders/transferors, submitted joint applications for transfer of the regular permits as provided under Section 82 of the MV Act. The consideration of the said applications was being adjourned. Accordingly, the prayers in the writ petitions are to direct the first respondent to pass orders on the applications for transfer of permit without waiting for the final adjudication of the renewal application concerning the stage carriages.

4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the first respondent stating that, without renewing the original permit, it was not possible to transfer the permit.

5. Heard Sri. Sajeev Kumar K. Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Sreejith V.S., Government Pleader, for the respondents.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner argues that there is no distinction between a regular permit and a temporary permit in the MV Act, and even a temporary permit holder has to be treated as a holder of a permit. It is also argued that in case the permit is renewed, by operation of law it will be treated as renewed from the date of expiry, which also makes it clear that the authorities need not wait for renewing the permit to consider the application for endorsing the transfer.

7. The learned Government submits that the impugned orders call for no interference as the same are issued in consonance with the relevant provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and corresponding rules, particularly Sections 80 , 81, 82, and 87 thereof. He also places reliance on the judgments passed by this Court in Usman v. Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram represented by its Secretary [(2015) 4 KHC 779] and Jaffer v. Usman and Ors. [(2015) 4 KLT 590] ,

8. The undisputed facts would show that renewal applications have been submitted by the permit holders, and that the stage carriages are now plying based on the temporary permits issued under the Act. A temporary permit is only for a limited period, and even the authorisation is granted temporarily. Power is also granted under section 87 of the Act to impose such conditions as the authority thinks fit for the grant of a temporary permit. As held by this Court inJaffer P. v. Usman and Ors. [2015 (4) KLT 590], a mere pendency of a renewal application cannot make a permit alive.

9. True, on the renewal of the permit, it will date back, but the same cannot be an answer for contending that, pending a renewal application, the transfer application has to be considered. It is pertinent to note that only a permit holder can apply for renewal, as done in the instant cases, and the said applications have not been allowed so