The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P5 order of the 1st respondent directing him to surrender the temporary permit issued to him in respect of stage carriage bearing Registration No.KL 33/D 7093 issued under Section 87 (1) (D) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988.
2. According to the petitioner, the temporary permit issued to him is valid till 24.07.2014. There is absolutely no justification for cancelling the temporary permit before the expiry of the term thereof. It is also contended that, Ext.P5 has been issued relying on a judgment of this Court sustaining a notification that was under challenge therein. According to the petitioner, he is also conducting a Fast Passenger Service. Considering the public interest and the interests of the travelling public, it is only appropriate that the petitioner is allowed to continue his service. The KSRTC has not even applied for the issue of a permit and they are not conducting services on the route. Therefore, stopping of the petitioner's services abruptly would seriously prejudice the travelling public.
3. Adv.Sri.P.C.Chacko appears for the 3rd respondent.
According to the counsel, the entire stage has been notified for the purpose of conducting higher class services like Fast Passenger, W.P.(C) No.14044 of 2014 2 Express Services, etc. The KSRTC is ready to start the services even from tomorrow. Therefore, it is contended that, the petitioner may not be permitted to conduct services as prayed for. The learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 1 and 2.
4. Heard. A perusal of Ext.P4 shows that, the same has been issued subject to the following conditions :
“4 MONTHS TEMP PERMIT U/S 87 (1) (D) OF THE MV ACT SUBJECT TO THE DECISION OF WP(C)18959/2013 AND CONNECTED CASES”
Ext.P4 has, therefore, been issued subject to the decision of this Court in the writ petition referred to above. It is not in dispute that W.P.(C).No.18959/2013 and connected cases have been dismissed. The judgment has been reported in Kerala State Limited Stop/Stage Carriage Operators Association v. Government of Kerala [2014 (2) KLT 135]. According to the counsel for the petitioner, writ appeals have been filed challenging the said judgment, they are still pending.
5. Since writ appeals are pending, it is for the petitioner to obtain appropriate interim orders in such writ appeals permitting continuance of the issue of the temporary permit or conduct of the services on the strength of the temporary permit already issued. Ext.P5 order has been issued in view of the stipulation contained in Ext.P4 limiting the temporary permit to either four months or to the decision of this Court in W.P.(C).No.18959/2013. In view of the W.P.(C) No.14044 of 2014 3 decision of this Court referred to above, Ext.P5 is justified. It is for the Division Bench, hearing the writ appeals against the judgment of the Single Bench to make appropriate arrangements for the conduct of services during the interregnum, until final orders are passed on them. The ground on which Ext.P5 has been issued cannot be said to be defective in any manner.
For the above reasons, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
AV