IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

TUESDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 29TH MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 2817 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S:

JOSEPH P.D., AGED 54 YEARS S/O. DAVID, RESIDING AT PALAYOOR, P.O.NARUKARA, VILLAGE MANJERI, HOUSE MELAKKAM, KARUVAMBRAM MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676121 BY ADV CHERIAN MATHEW POOTHICOTE RESPONDENT/S:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001

2 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, TRANS TOWER, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014

3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION ROAD, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505 GP-SREEJITH V.S THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P3 proceedings of the Regional Transport Officer, Malappuram, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of licence in respect of a Pollution Testing Centre, being operated by the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the application filed by the petitioner for renewal was rejected on the ground that the petitioner does not comply with the stipulations contained in Circular No.13 of 2024 dated 13.03.2024, issued by the Transport Commissioner. It is submitted that the Pollution Testing Centre of the petitioner has been operating on the basis of a valid licence from a date prior to the issuance of Circular No.13 of 2024.

3. It is submitted that this Court has considered an identical issue in several cases and has taken the view that the stipulations in Circular No.13 of 2024 will apply only in the case of applications for grant of fresh licence made on or after the date of the Circular and shall not apply in the case of renewal of licence of Pollution Testing Centres, which were operating prior to the date of issuance of the Circular.

4. The learned Government Pleader does not dispute that this Court has taken the view that stipulations in Circular No.13 of 2024 will apply only in the case of applications for fresh licence made on or after the date of the Circular and the stipulations therein will not apply in the case of renewal of licence of Pollution Testing Centres, which were operating on the basis of a valid licence prior to the date of the Circular. However, it is pointed out that a reading of Ext.P3 order in this case will indicate that there are other objections also for renewal of the licence of the petitioner.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having regard to the submissions made as above, I am of the view that this Writ Petition can be disposed of setting aside Ext.P3 and directing re- consideration of the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of his licence, making it clear that while the stipulations in Circular No.13 of 2024, which were not in place prior to the date of issuance of the said Circular shall not be applied to deny renewal of licence to the petitioner. The petitioner will be required to comply with all other stipulations, which were in existence prior to the date of issuance of Circular No.13 of 2024, including the stipulations in G.O(RT) No.48 of 1996 dated 15.02.1996.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed by quashing Ext.P3 and directing a re-consideration of the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of licence without insisting on any new stipulation contained in Circular No.13 of 2024, but making it clear that the petitioner is liable to comply with all the requirements, which were in place prior to the date of issuance of Circular No.13 of 2024, including any stipulation contained in G.O(RT) No.48 of 1996 dated 15.02.1996.

The competent among the respondents shall pass fresh orders as direct