IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Murali Purushothaman, J
Manoop M.V – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Regional Transport Authority – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. right of a stage carriage operator to substitute a vehicle post-grant but pre-issuance of permit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was granted permit as per Ext.P1 in respect of his stage carriage bearing Registration No.KL 09/AE 8082 on the route Manakkadavu - Payyannur on 06.05.2025. Subsequent to the grant of permit, the petitioner produced the current records of stage carriage No.KL 60/H 0239, which is a 2013 model vehicle. It is contended that in order to issue granted permit, the respondent is requiring him to produce the earlier vehicle No.KL 09/AE 8082. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the light of the decision reported in Vinod Thomas v. RTA, Kottayam [1999 KHC 276], there is no legal impediment in issuing permit to the subsequent vehicle produced by the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following relief:
“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding the respondent to settle the timings in pursuance to Ext.P1 grant made by the Regional Transport Authority and issue permit to the stage carriage bearing No.KL 56/Y 3132, without any delay.”
2.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.