W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: S. Manikumar
Shaji P. Chaly
Judgment Date: 2021-07-27
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petitions are disposed of.
Final Disposition: Writ petitions disposed of.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Venugopalan.K.S Manimandir
T.J. Raju
Bijumon
Beevi Meethin

Respondents

The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam
The Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam
The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• G. Prabhakaran
• P. Deepak
• P. Deepak
• P. Deepak

Counsels for Respondents

• Surin George Ipe
• P. C. Chacko

Case Synopsis & Summary

These writ petitions challenge the legality of temporary permits and the period of temporary registrations for private stage carriage operators on routes notified and served by the State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) in Ernakulam. The High Court of Kerala, by a common bench of Chief Justice S. Manikumar and Justice Shaji P. Chaly, notes that the period for temporary registration sought has expired. The court recognizes that the issue is already squarely covered by this court’s Division Bench in Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Akash Dev (2020 (3) KLT 218) and a controlling Supreme Court decision in Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Baby P. P. and others (2018) 7 SCC 501. The Baby P. P. decision holds that a private operator cannot be permitted to traverse on a notified route served by the STU beyond the permissible distance under the scheme—either more than 5 kilometers or 5% of the private operator’s route, whichever is less. The division bench has found that the earlier arguments are not disputed and that the matter falls within the ratio of the Supreme Court’s decision. Therefore, reference to Akash Dev and Baby P. P. supports the conclusion that the temporary permits were not to be continued, and the High Court disposes of the writ petitions accordingly, applying the said precedents to all connected petitions with a common outcome.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 104 (Proviso) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988SRO 608 of 2009

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend for the grant/continuation of temporary permits on routes notified and served by STU, citing past permits (Exhibits P1–P5) and arguing for flexibility in temporary permissions during regulatory transitions. They emphasize the need to maintain service until route conventions are finalized, highlighting prior interim permits and ancillary orders. They rely on circulars and the factual matrix of the petitions to argue that temporary permits should not be extinguished until a determination is made under the scheme. The petitioners also pressed that the question should be resolved in light of Division Bench and Supreme Court precedents to ensure continuity of service.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that the period of temporary registration has elapsed and that the central issue is governed by established precedents. They point to Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Akash Dev (2020 (3) KLT 218) and the Supreme Court decision in Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Baby P. P. and others (2018) 7 SCC 501, which hold that temporary permits cannot exceed the permissible distance on routes served by the STU (5 kms or 5%), and that the petitions fail under the current scheme. They emphasize aligning with statutory framework and preventing disruption to STU services.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Akash Dev	2020 (3) KLT 218	Positive	Court notes the issue is squarely covered by this Division Bench decision and applies its reasoning.
Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Baby P. P. and others	[(2018) 7 SCC 501]	Positive	Supreme Court held that temporary permits on notified routes served by STU cannot exceed permissible distance; High Court applies this ratio.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -1- **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY** **TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 5345 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **VENUGOPALAN.K.S MANIMANDIRAM, HANUMAN KOVIL LANE, CHERANELLOOR, S.CHITTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM. BY ADV SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**THE SECRETARY**| |---|---| ||**REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM - 682 030.**| |**2**|**THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY**| ||**ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN - 682**| ||**030.**| |**3**|**DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER**| ||**KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM -**| ||**682 030.**| ||**SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. G.P. FOR R1 AND R2**| ||**SRI. P. C. CHACKO, SC FOR R3**| **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.07.2021, ALONG WITH WPC 5827 OF 2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -2- ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 5827 OF 2016** **PETITIONER/S:** **T.J.RAJU AGED 55 YEARS THOTTAMKARA, SOUTH PARAVOOR, THRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV SRI.P.DEEPAK** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM**| |---|---| ||**682 030.**| |**2**|**THE SECRETARY**| ||**REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM 682030.**| |**3**|**THE KERLAA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION**| ||**REPRESETNED BY TIS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,**| ||**'TRANSPORT BHAVAN', THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM 695 001.**| ||**SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. G.P. FOR R1 AND R2**| ||**SRI. P. C. CHACKO, SC FOR R3**| |**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**|| |**27.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5345/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE**|| |**COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**|| W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -3- ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943** ## **WP(C) NO. 5851 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **BEEVI MEETHIN AGED 56 YEARS W/O.MEETHIN, MEENTHARAKKAL HOUSE, CHOORNIKKARA, ALUVA.** **BY ADV SRI.P.DEEPAK** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM ERNAKULAM.682 030.** - **2 THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM.682 030.** - **3 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, "TRANSPORT BHAVAN", THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001. SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. G.P. FOR R1 AND R2 SRI. P. C. CHACKO, SC FOR R3** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5345/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -4- ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY TUESDAY, THE 27[TH] DAY OF JULY 2021 / 5TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 5870 OF 2016** **PETITIONER/S:** **BIJUMON AGED 47 YEARS POOVATHUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, ELOOR WEST, ERNAKULAM BY ADV SRI.P.DEEPAK** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** |**1**|**THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY**| |---|---| ||**ERNAKULAM 682030**| |**2**|**THE SECRETARY**| ||**REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM 682030**| |**3**|**THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION**| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR,**| ||**'TRANSPORT BHAVAN', THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001**| ||**SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. G.P. FOR R1 AND R2**| ||**SRI. P. C. CHACKO, SC FOR R3**| |**THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON**|| |**27.07.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).5345/2016 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE**|| |**COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**|| W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -5- ## **J U D G M E N T** ## S. Manikumar, C.J. By common reference order dated 22.02.2016, a learned Single Judge has directed the Registry, to place these writ petitions before the Hon'ble Chief Justice, for an appropriate order. Thus after orders, these writ petitions are posted before us. 2. Period of temporary registration sought for is over. That apart, Mr. P. C. Chacko, learned counsel for the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation, submitted that the issue is squarely covered by a Hon'ble Division Bench judgment of this Court in **Kerala State Road Transport Corporation v. Akash Dev [2020 (3) KLT 218]** . 3. The said contention has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. 4. That apart, attention was also invited to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Kerala State Road Transport** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -6- **Corporation v. Baby P. P. and others [(2018) 7 SCC 501]** , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held thus:- “39. In view of this discussion, the following answer emerges: 39.1 A temporary permit cannot be issued to a private stage carriage operator to traverse on the notified route which is being served by the STU, in excess of the permissible distance provided under the scheme. 39.2 To rephrase, under the facts of this case, it is not open for a private stage carriage operator (the respondent no. 1) to operate its services by overlapping on a notified route for more than 5 kms or 5% (whichever is less) of the route of the private 37 stage carriage operator (as specified under the Scheme) which is being served by the STU. 40. Accordingly, the judgment of STAT, the consequent order of the RTA granting temporary permit to the respondent no. 1, as well as the judgment of the High Court, are set aside. The appeals before us are hereby allowed. Consequently, O.P.(C) No. 1827 of 2017, as preferred by the appellant KSRTC, stands allowed. As regards the O.P.(C) No. 1784 of 2017 and O.P.(C) No. 581 of 2017, the same order shall govern their outcome.” W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -7- 5. Reference now made does not require any answer, as the matter is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court stated supra. Accordingly, writ petitions are disposed of. **Sd/-** **S. MANIKUMAR** **CHIEF JUSTICE** **Sd/-** **SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE** Eb ///TRUE COPY/// P. A. TO JUDGE W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -8- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5345/2016** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR THE PERIOD 17.12.2012 TO 05.01.2013 DATED 14.12.2012.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR THE PERIOD 11.06.2015 TO 30.06.2015 DATED 12.06.2015.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT FOR THE PERIOD 22.01.2016 TO 10.02.2016 DATED 22.01.2016. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING OF THE RTA ERNAKULAM DATED 22.12.2015 SIGNED ON 04.06.2016. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 06.02.2016.** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -9- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5827/2016** **PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 1.10.2014 TO 31.01.2015 EXHIBIT P1(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 1.2.2015 TO 31.05.2015 EXHIBIT P1(B) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 5-6-2015 TO 24.6.2015 EXHIBIT P1(C) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 25.6.2015 TO 14.7.2015 EXHIBIT P(D) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 15.7.2015 TO 14.11.2015 EXHIBIT P(E) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 15.11.2015 TO 4.12.2015 EXHIBIT P(F) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 5.12.2015 TO 24.12.2015 EXHIBIT P(G) A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 3.2.2016 TO 22.2.2016 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE OCPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2015 EXHIBIT P(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES INSPECTOR, ERNAKULAM DATED 30.9.2014 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATD 14.7.2009 PUBLISHED AS SRO NO.608 OF 2009 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT FILED U/S.104 (PROVISO) DATED 9.2.2016** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -10- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5851/2016** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1** **EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID FROM 10.11.201509.03.2016. EXHIBIT P1(A) A TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT (P.ST.G/92/99/E). EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2015. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 14.07.2009 PUBLISHED AS SRO NO.608 OF 2009. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT FILED U/S 104 (PROVISO) DATED 08.02.2016.** W.P.(C) 5345/16 and connected cases -11- ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5870/2016** **PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED VALID TILL 28.09.2015 EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 22.12.2015 EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 14.07.2009 PUBLISHED AS SRO NO.608/2009 EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT FILED U/S. 104 (PROVISO) DATED 11.02.2016**