Kerala High Court
Nishanth K vs State Of Kerala on 6 July, 2018
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 19675 of 2018
PETITIONERS :
1 NISHANTH K.,
AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KANNANKUNHI K.,
NEENA NIVAS, AVIKKARA, GARDEN VALAPPU,
KANHANGAD, HOSDURG TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
2 NISHAD M.V.,
AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER K.A.,
KANHANGAD, HOSDURG TALUK,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
3 MUHAMMED ASHARAF N.P.,
AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL RAHIMAN,
RAZIYA MANZIL, PADANNAKKAD,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
4 ASHARAF,
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ASSAINAR,
NHANIKKADAVU, OZHINHAVALAPPU,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
5 JAFAR K.M.,
AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.BASHEER,
MOOVARIKKUND, PADANNAKKAD,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
6 ABDUL SAMAD P.,
AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.C.K.MOIDEENKUNHI,
KALLURAVI, KANHANGAD SOUTH P.O.,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
7 SANEEJ M.,
AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.HASSAINAR,
KANHANGAD KADAPPURAM, HOSDURG,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
WP(C).No. 19675 of 2018
8 SATHYAN,
AGED 43 YEAR, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN,
HOSDURG BEACH, KANHANGAD,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
9 P.KRISHNAN,
AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KANNAN P.,
PARAKKOT, KANHANGAD SOUTH,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
10 SALAM C.P.,
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED C.H.,
PUNJAVI, OZHINHAVALAPPU,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
11 RASHID M.,
AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.ABDULKHADER,
MANDYAN HOUSE, PADANNAKKAD,
HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.V.VENUGOPAL
RESPONDENTS :
1. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671315.
3. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671315.
* ADDL.4TH RESPONDENT IMPLEADED:
4. THE KANHANGAD MUNICIPALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671315.
* ADDL. 4TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 06.7.2018
IN I.A.12009/2018.
R1-R3 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 19675 of 2018 (H)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 14-J 7571.
EXHIBIT P2- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 C 9218.
EXHIBIT P3- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 D 3438.
EXHIBIT P4- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 14 E 9792.
EXHIBIT P5- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 A 5026.
EXHIBIT P6- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 N 5087.
EXHIBIT P7- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 M 7998.
EXHIBIT P8- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 E 512.
EXHIBIT P9- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 B 229.
EXHIBIT P10- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 N 4835.
EXHIBIT P11- A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION
OF KL 60 N 5164.
EXHIBIT P12- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P13- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P14- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P15- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P16- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 5TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P17- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER.
WP(C).No. 19675 of 2018 (H)
EXHIBIT P18- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 7TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P19- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 8TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P20- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 9TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P21- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 10TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P22- A TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE 11TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P23- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P24- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P25- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P26- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P27- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P28- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P29- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P30- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 8TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P31- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 9TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P32- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 10TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P33- A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO VARY THE
CONDITION SUBMITTED BY THE 11TH PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
EL
12.7.2018
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P .(C)No.19675 of 2018
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of July, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioners, who are stated to be registered owners of auto-rickshaws covered by Exhibit-P1 to P11 Registration Certificates and Exhibit-P12 to Exhibit-P22 contract carriage permits to operate on all fit roads in Kasaragod District subject to the condition that the vehicle shall not park or pick up the passengers within the city, by allotting parking place at Ajanur, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the restrictive conditions in regard to the parking and picking of passengers within the city in Exhibit-P12 to Exhibit-P22, contract carriage permits and to declare that condition as illegal; and also a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd and 3rd respondents to accept Exhibit-P23 to Exhibit-P33 applications and effect variations in Exhibit-P12 to Exhibit-P22 contract carriage permits, permitting the petitioners to park and pick up passengers within the Kanhangad Municipality, in the light of the decision reported in Rajesh v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority [2014 (3) KLT 341].
W.P.(C)No.19675 of 2018 :-2-:
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and also the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the additional 4th respondent Municipality.
3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, the petitioners are not pressing Relief No.1, in view of the statutory remedy available. It is also submitted that though the petitioners have approached the 2nd respondent with Exhibit-P23 to Exhibit-P33 applications, the same were not entertained. In such circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking appropriate reliefs.
4. The learned Senior Government Pleader on instructions would submit that the 2nd respondent is yet to receive Exhibit-P23 to Exhibit-P33 applications and that, the said respondent shall accept such applications, if they are in order and place it before the 3rd respondent Regional Transport Authority.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners shall re-submit Exhibit-P23 to Exhibit-P33 applications before the 2nd respondent and they shall also remit the requisite fee, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
W.P.(C)No.19675 of 2018 :-3-:
In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions ;
(i) Within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the petitioners shall re-submit Exhibit-P23 to Exhibit-P33 applications before the 2nd respondent and remit the requisite fee.
(ii) If the applications submitted by the petitioners are in order, the 2nd respondent shall place it before the 3rd respondent Regional Transport Authority and thereafter, the 3rd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioners and also to the Secretary of the additional 4th respondent Municipality.
(iii) Decisions in this regard shall be taken, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks thereafter.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE DSV/7/7/18