Kerala High Court
Kerala Bus Transport Association vs The Transport Commissioner on 9 October, 2014
Author: K.Vinod Chandran
Bench: K.Vinod Chandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY,THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/20TH KARTHIKA, 193611
RP.No. 821 of 2014 (J)
--------------------------
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6893/2014 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
...
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/WRIT PETITIONERS:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. KERALA BUS TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION,
REGN NO 710/2006, SALU COMPLEX
MISSION QUARTERS JUNCTION, T. B. ROAD,
THRISSUR-680 001,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT JOHNSON PADAMADAN
2. T .P. ALI, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.T.K. PAREEKUTTY,
THEKKETHAMARACHALIL HOUSE, VADACODE P O,
KANGARAPPADY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682021
3. BALAKRISHNAN, KUNNATH HOUSE,
PAUL'S APARTMENT, ELAMAKKARA, PIN-682026
BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN
SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
-------------------------------------------------
1. THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER,
RANS TOWERS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031.
3. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
THRIPUNITHURA-682301.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
RP.No. 821 of 2014 (J)
-------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
----------------------------------------
ANNEXURE - I: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 9.10.2014 IN
WP(C)6893/2014 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
ANNEXURE - II: TRUE COPY OF THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES STANDARD
NO.018/2001 ALONG WITH ALL AMENDMENTS THERETO.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: - NIL
-------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
mbr/
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
R.P.No.821 of 2014
in
W.P.(C).No. 6893 of 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated 11th November, 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ORDER
Review of the judgment is sought on the ground that clause 3.4 of AIS 018/2001 as provided under the proviso to sub-rule (2) of Rule 118 of the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989 (for short 'CMV Rules') has been amended. Sub-rule (2) of Rule 118 specifically spoke of a speed limiting function, as specified in clause 3.4 of AIS 018/2001. Even going by the amendment, speed limiting function means "function to control the fuel feed of the vehicle or engine management in order to limit the vehicle speed to a fixed maximum value".
2. In any event, this Court has only said that merely on the assertion of a stage carriage operator, the Motor Vehicles Department cannot RP.821/14 2 be interdicted from carrying on inspection. There can be no declaration that no inspection shall be carried out if the speed governor fitted in the vehicle is in accordance with what is provided under sub-rule (2) of Rule 118 of the CMV Rules. Definitely, only on inspection the officers of the Motor Vehicles Department would be able to verify whether the speed governor fitted is of that specification or not.
In the above circumstances, the Review Petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge Mrcs //True Copy//