SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 26083

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
Ratheesh M.C. – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 14757 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE, SHRI.DENNISE JACOB SAVY
For the Respondents: SRI. P.S. APPU, GP.

Mandamus issued directing expeditious consideration of temporary permit application under Motor Vehicles Act.

Headnote:Under section 87(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the petitioner applied for a temporary permit for his stage carriage on the route Thiruwilwamala - Ottapalam via the newly opened Kondazy-Kuthambully Bridge, supported by a route enquiry report. The authority had not considered the application. The court directed consideration of the application expeditiously. The issue was the delay in processing the application for temporary permit. The court observed that in the facts and circumstances, the application required prompt consideration. Direction issued to consider and dispose of the application within one month; writ petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. application for temporary permit under section 87(1)(c). (Para 1)
2. hearing of counsel for parties. (Para 2)
3. direction for expeditious consideration within one month. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 application under section 87(1)(c) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 , for temporary permit on the route Thiruwilwamala – Ottapalam in respect of his stage carriage bearing registration no.KL-48-V-5859. The petitioner has also produced Ext.P3 route enquiry report. The grievance of the petitioner is that Ext.P2 application is not so far considered by the respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following relief:- “1. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or such other writ, order or direction commanding the respondent to forthwith consider Ext P2 application for temporary permit filed by the petitioner in respect of KL-48-V-5859 on the route TIRUWILWAMALA-OTTAPALAM via the newly opened KONDAZY-KUTHAMBULLY BRIDGE and issue temporary permit with Exhibit P2 (a) time schedule in the light of Exhibit P3 route enquiry report.”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P2 application for temporary permit, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top