RTA -19.04.2018 Minutes of Regional Transport Authority, Held on 19.04.2018 Present: 1. Sri. Amit Meena IAS, District Collector; Chairman of RTA, Malappuram. 2. Sri. Shaji Joseph, Deputy Transport Commissioner (C Z 1); Member, RTA Item No.1 Heard. This is to consider the modified application for fresh S/C permit to operate on the route -Adakkakundu (via) Pannippara, Edavanna, Thiruvali, , Vaniyambalam, Anchachavadi, and Chenkode as ordinary service. The applicant has submitted a proposal for fresh stage carriage permit on the route Kozhikkode Palayam Stand – Adakkakunde as LSOS previously and the same was considered by this authority held on 29.09.2015 in Item no. 22 and the decision was adjourned for want of Concurrence from Sister RTA Kozhikkode as Ordinary service. The applicant has further submitted a request for changing the requested class of permit as Ordinary Service and grant the permit subject to counter signature from Sister RTA, Kozhikkode. The application was further placed before the RTA held on 11.07.2016; in Item No. 4 and the decision on the application was further adjourned with a direction to add more number of trips to ill-served route Adakkakunde and then to obtain concurrence from Sister RTA, Kozhikkode. Now, the applicant has placed a modified proposal by avoiding portions in Kozhikkode District and modified the route as Areekode – Adakkakunde. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.2 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from Hon. STAT in MVAA No. 58/2017; Dtd. 09.02.2018 and also to re-consider the application for fresh stage carriage permit to operate on the route Kalikavu – – Thelppara (via) , Karuvarakunde, Thuvvur, East Pandikkad, Pandikkad, Nellikkuth, Kuttipara, , Anakayam, Irumbuzhi, Malappuram, Ponmala, Othukkungal, , Chankuvetti, Edarikkode, Kuttippala, 1 RTA -19.04.2018 Vailathur and via. Anchchavidi, Vaniyambalam, Wandoor, Cherukode, Peleppuram, Kuttipara and Chokkad and Pookottumpadam as ordinary service. The matter was placed before the RTA held on 11.07.2016 in Item No. 82 and the decision was adjourned with a direction to the Secretary, RTA to: 1) re-enquire the total route length of the proposed route; 2) re-enquire the overlapping distance on the proposed route and 3) report with statistical evidence on the stage carriage frequency and the feasibility of more fresh stage carriage operations on the Tirur – Manjeri sector. Further, the matter was re-enquired by the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Malappuram and as per his report: 1) The total route length of the proposed route is 126.4 Kms 2) Total overlapping distance is 3.4 Kms 3) Average frequency of stage carriage frequency on the Tirur – Manjeri sector from 5.00 a.m. to 7.00 a.m. is 15 Minutes; and 7.00 a.m. to 10.00 a.m. is 8 Minutes and from 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. it is 5 Minutes and from 6.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. it is 10 Minutes. The matter was further considered by the RTA held on 25.10.2016 in item no. 3 and rejected the application on following grounds: 1) the applicant has not furnished the details of the vehicle to which the fresh permit is sought for, such as registration mark, type of vehicle, Seating Capacity and Maximum Laden Weight etc. required by item No. 6 to 8 in Form P.St.S.A as per section 70[1] Clause[f] of Motor Vehicles Act 1988. 2) Further, the enquiry officer has reported that the proposed route contains five termini and combination of various routes, which is against the provision of law. 3) Most of the proposed routes are well-served, especially Manjeri – Tirur; average stage carriage frequency in this route is appx 5 minutes in peak hours and stage carriages are operating in that sector without sufficient time gap. 4) the route plan proposed by the applicant is not public friendly and this authority is of the view that the suggested proposal is not viable. The proposed daily mileage is 291.3 Kms. This authority strongly feels that the proposal is not beneficial to the travelling public of that area. Against the decision of RTA, the applicant has approached Hon. STAT in MVAA No. 58/2017; Dtd. 09.02.2018 and the Hon. STAT has set aside the previous decision of this authority and directed to re-consider the matter afresh. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. The applicant has offered the vehicle KL 55 F 4255 for endorsing the permit. This is a stage carriage bus with date of registration on 25.05.2010. In this context, regular permit 2 RTA -19.04.2018 is granted on the above said route subject to settlement of timings and the applicant is directed to produce the current records of a vehicle as specified in the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental Item 2 within thirty days of communication of this decision as per Rule 159[2] of KMV Rules 1989 failing which the grant of the regular permit will be treated as revoked without further notice. Item No.3 Heard. This is to re-consider the modified application for fresh stage carriage permit to operate on the route Chemmad – Tirur via Thirurangadi, Cherumuck, Theyyala, Pandimuttam, Chembra, Payyanangadi, with One trip touching Tanur from Pandimuttam via. Kannamthali and with 2 single trips on the Chemmad – Tirur route via. Kodinji, Pandimuttam, Theyyala, Parappuram and Vailathur as ordinary service. The application was previously considered by the RTA held on 11.07.2016 in Item No. 78 and adjourned the decision with a direction to modify the application with two more additional trips to Tanur from Chemmad. Now, the applicant has modified the proposal and the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Tirur has ascertained the modified proposal. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.4 Heard. This is to re-consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route – Areacode (via) Mundakkulam, Muthuparamba, Pothuvettipara, Mundakkal, Cheruparamba and Vavoor Road and touching Kizhisseri in the morning from Pothuvettipara via. Onnam Miles two singles and halt at Pothuvettipara as Ordinary Service. The application was previously considered by the RTA held on 31.08.2017 in Item No. 15 and the matter was adjourned for want of a specific road fitness certificate. The matter was communicated to the Secretary, Cheakode Grama Panchayath and revised report has been obtained. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. 3 RTA -19.04.2018 We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No. 5 Heard. This is to re-consider the modified application for fresh S/C permit to operate on the route Kuttippuram – Tirur (via) Chembi, Thirunavaya, Codakkal, Thuprangode, Alathiyoor, B P Angadi, Thazhepalam, Ezhur, Vairankode, Patternadakkavu, Edakkulam and also via. Karathoor as Ordinary Service. This authority has considered this application in its setting held on 24.10.2017 in Item No. 10 and adjourned the decision on this application with following notes: As per the existing timing schedule, the proposed vehicle is operating on the route Kuttippuram – Tirur via Karathur and also via Alathiyur. Kuttippuram – Tirur via Alathiyur is comparatively less-served route than via Karathur. As per the report of the route enquiry officer, the stage carriage frequency in Kuttippuram – Tirur sector via Alathiyoor is 20 Minutes and that of via Karathur is 7 Minutes. In the open hearing of this authority, there are lot many en-route operators have raised their objections that there is hardly no time gap available on this route and increasing more number of trips on this route will lead to unhealthy competition and the same will leads to accidents. Upon verification of related documents, this authority is also of the opinion that the frequency of stage carriage operation on the route Kuttippuram – Tirur via Karathur is even less than 5 Minutes. However the application is considered as per law and we are of the considered opinion that number of trips via Karathur on the Tirur – Kuttippuram route has to be reduced. Instead, the applicant can propose more number of trips via Alathiyur, comparatively less served area. In this context, the Secretary, RTA is directed to modify the application in consultation with the applicant so as to add two more trips from Kuttippuram to Tirur via Alathiyur within the existing time framework and place before this authority. The applicant has submitted a revised proposal with trips to Tirur via Alathiyur. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh 4 RTA -19.04.2018 ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No. 6 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 4879 of 2018 and also to re-consider the application for fresh S/C permit to operate on the route Tirur – Kalikavu via. Vylathur, Kuttippala, Edarikkode, Chnankuvetti, Kottakkal, Othukkungal, Ponmala, Malappuram, Munduparamba Govt. College, Irumbuzhi, Anakkayam, Medical College, Manjeri, Nellikkuth, Pandikkad, Thuvvur, Punnakkad and KaruvarakkundeKizhakkethala as Ordinary Service. The application was considered by the RTA held on 24.10.2017 in Item No. 12 and the decision was adjourned with a direction to obtain a specific report with vehicle statistics. Meanwhile the applicant has approached Hon. High Court of Kerala and in WP(C) No. 4879 of 2018 and Hon. High Court has directed to consider the application and take a final decision in the next meeting itself. This authority has considered the request of the applicant in obedience with the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.7 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 5761 of 2018 and also to re-consider the application for fresh S/C permit to operate on the route Kalikavu – Tirur via. KaruvarakundeKizhakkethala, Punnakkad, Thuvvur, KizhakkePandikkad, Pandikkad, Nellikkuth, Manjeri (halt at Manjeri) Anakkayam, Munduparamba Govt. College, Malappuram, Ponmala, Othukkungal, Kottakkal, Chankuvetti, Edarikkode, Kuttippala and Vylathur as Ordinary Service. 5 RTA -19.04.2018 The application was considered by the RTA held on 24.10.2017 in Item No. 12 and the decision was adjourned with a direction to obtain a specific report with vehicle statistics. Meanwhile the applicant has approached Hon. High Court of Kerala and in WP(C) No. 4879 of 2018 and Hon. High Court has directed to consider the application and take a final decision in the next meeting itself. This authority has considered the request of the applicant in obedience with the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No. 8 Heard. This is to re-consider the modified application for fresh S/C permit to operate on the route Kadampuzha-Malappuram (via) Anakkuzhiyal, Maravattam, Kottappuram, Vattapparamba, C.H. Road, Valiyad, Vadakkemana, one round trip Kadampuzha- Malappuram (via) Anakuzhiyal, Chithrampalli, Karekkad, Chenadamkulambu, Konikkallu, Pang-Chendi, Kolkalam, Kottappuram, Halt at Pathayakkallu (via) Mukkilappedika as Ordinary Service. The application was previously considered by the RTA held on 24.10.2017 in Item No. 8 and the decision was adjourned for want of : 1) a modified time schedule with two more trips to Pathayakkallu 2) fresh enquiry report with remark on the availability of space for a stage carriage to wait 5-10 Minutes at C H Road 3) Modified route sketch with all important points The applicant has submitted a modified proposal with more trips to Pathayakkallu and also without any halting or waiting at C H Road with a route sketch. MVI, Tirur has ascertained the modified proposal. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh

6 RTA -19.04.2018 ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.9 Heard. This is to consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route Karachal – Mampad - Wandoor (via) Pullippadam, Odayikkal, Beembungal, Rajiv Gandhi Road, PHC Road Junction, Panchayath Office, Mampad, Meppadam, Panthalingal, Millumpadi, Cherumunda, Thangalpadi and Naduvath with Halt at Mampad as Ordinary Service In the open hearing of this authority the learned counsel applicant has submitted that they are not interested to proceed this application in this meeting and requested to adjourn the decision on this application. This authority has considered the request and the same is approved. Also the Secretary RTA will have to submit this application before the next RTA for consideration. Hence decision on this application is adjourned. Item No.10 Heard. To consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route Kunnumpuram – Chemmad (via) Thottasseri Ara, Puthiyedathpuraya, Yarathumpadi, Chendapuraya, V K padi, Mampuram Road, Mampuram Makham and Mampuram Bridge with Halt at Puthuparamba (starting single trip from Puthuparamba via. Mini bazaar, Muthalamad, Kooriyad, Kakkad, Kolappuram and A R Nagar and halting single trip from V K Padi via. Kolappuram as Ordinary Service. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. The objections submitted before this authority during the public sitting were also heard and considered as per law. As per the report of the route enquiry officer this is an intra-district route with length 27.8 Kms. In this route, the portion Mampuram bridge and its approach road is virgin. Fitness certificate from competent authority is seen obtained. There is overlapping with notified route from Chemmad to Mampuram (0.8 Kms) and which is not objectionable as per the present notified scheme. Also, the reporting officer has submitted that there is no 7 RTA -19.04.2018 direct bus service from Kunnumpuram to Chemmad via. Mampuram Bridge. There is no legal impediment for the proposed route as per G.O. (P) No. 8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. The applicant has also offed a vehicle KL 65 H 5171 for endorsing the permit; which is registered on 30.09.2016 and thus complies the direction of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental Item 2. In this context, regular permit is granted to the stage carriage KL 65 H 5171 on the above said route subject to settlement of timings and the applicant is directed to produce the current records of the vehicle KL 65 H 5171 within thirty days of communication of this decision as per Rule 159[2] of KMV Rules 1989 failing which the grant of the regular permit will be treated as revoked without further notice. Item No.11 Heard. This is to consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route Pandikkad – Manjeri – Cheruvatty – Chundamanna - Perimbalam and Padinhattumuri /Vadakkummuri (via) Colony Road, Tharippadi, Athani, Nadukundu, Nellikkuthu, Cholakkal, Payyanad, Chengara, Elambra, Valiyapoyil, Koyilandi, Kuttasserry, Vyaparappadi, Vettekkode, Alungal, Ernhikkal, Pullancherry, Puzhankavu, Kottakkuth, Mukkam, Nellikkuth School, Thangalpadi, Valluvangad Palam, Kalamkavu, Marattappadi, Kodasserri, Veettikkattiri, Chunkathakunnu, Thodiyanmala and via. Charamkavu and Amayamkode, Mukkam, Millumpadi, Pilakkal, Anakkayam, Enangaparamba, Panayi, Mullampara, Valavil, Vadakkummuri, Karumthodi as Ordinary Service This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. The objections submitted before this authority during the public sitting were also heard and considered as per law. As per the report of the route enquiry officer, the above said route is intra-district with route length 83.1 Kms. There is no virgin portion and no overlapping with any of the notified routes. The frequency of stage carriage operation on portion of the route is about one hour. The applicant has offered the vehicle KL 10 AX 2688 for endorsing the permit. The vehicle offered is with date of registration 21.03.2017. In this context, regular permit is granted to the stage carriage KL 10 AX 2688 on the above said route subject to settlement of timings and the applicant is directed to produce the current records of the vehicle KL 10 AX 2688 within thirty days of communication of

8 RTA -19.04.2018 this decision as per Rule 159[2] of KMV Rules 1989 failing which the grant of the regular permit will be treated as revoked without further notice. Item No.12 Heard. This is to consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route Kunnumpuram – Chemmad (via) Thottasseri Ara, Puthiyedathpuraya, Yarathumpadi, Chendapuraya, V K padi, Mampuram Road, Mampuram Makham and Mampuram Bridge with Halt at Puthuparamba (starting single trip from Puthuparamba via. Mini bazaar, Muthalamad, Kooriyad, Kakkad, Kolappuram and A R Nagar and halting single trip from V K Padi via. Kolappuram as Ordinary Service This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant did not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.13 Heard. This is to consider the application for regular Stage Carriage permit to operate on the route Vattathani – Tirur (via) Vellachal, Ozhur, Tanalur, Thalakkadathur and Moochikkal as Ordinary Service. This authority has considered the request of the applicant; verified connected files and records in detail. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. The objections submitted before this authority during the public sitting were also heard and considered as per law. As per the report of the route enquiry officer, this is an intra-district route with route length 20.7 Kms. There is no virgin portion and an overlapping of 4.3 Kms with notified route – Chelari, as per the said notification there is no objectionable overlapping. The applicant has also offered a 2017 model stage carriage KL 55 W 6482 for endorsing the permit.

9 RTA -19.04.2018 In this context, regular permit is granted to the stage carriage KL 55 W 6482 on the above said route subject to settlement of timings and the applicant is directed to produce the current records of the vehicle KL 55 W 6482 within thirty days of communication of this decision as per Rule 159[2] of KMV Rules 1989 failing which the grant of the regular permit will be treated as revoked without further notice. Item No.14 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of regular permit in respect of the Stage Carriage KL-15-6702 (10/63/2014) for a period of five years on the route Vazhikadav--Kozhikode as LSOS from the M.D.; KSRTC. This authority has considered the application and heard the representative in the open hearing of this authority. Renewal of regular permit 10/63/2014 with respect to the stage carriage KL 15 6702 on the above said route is granted. Item No.15 Heard. This is a request for granting maximum time as per Rule 159 of Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 for producing current records of brand new vehicle bearing chassis no. MAT513102H7J14503 for endorsing the granted permit by the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram held on 10.01.2018 in Item No. 18 on the route Tirur – Kuttippuram – Koottayi Azhimugham. This Authority has granted a fresh stage carriage permit on the route Tirur – Kuttippuram – Koottayi Azhimugham in its sitting on 10.01.2018 in Item No. 18 subject to the production of current records of the stage carriage with temporary registration KL 10 U TEMP 3141 within 30 days of communication of the decision of RTA. The decision was communicated to the applicant on 03.03.2018. On 13.03.2018; however, the applicant has submitted a request for granting maximum time as per Rule 159 of Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 for producing current records of brand new vehicle bearing chassis no. MAT513102H7J14503 for endorsing the granted permit. We have considered the request in the light of the conditions stipulated in KMVR 159 (2) and maximum time of four months in aggregate is granted from the date of communication of the decision of RTA held on 10.01.2018. As per records, the decision was communicated to the applicant on 03.03.2018, and hence four months from 03.03.2018 is allowed for the production of current records of the above said vehicle. If the applicant is failed to produce the current records of the vehicle within that period, the granted order for sanction the permit stands revoked. Item No.16 Heard. This is a request for granting maximum time as per Rule 159 of Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules 1989 for producing current records of a suitable vehicle for endorsing the granted permit on the route - (touching Kadalundi 4 single trips 10 RTA -19.04.2018 and Chelari 2 single trips and Pandimuttam 2 Single trips) via. Chemmad, Alinchuvadu, Kunnathparamba, Kundankadavu palam, Thayyilappadi, Ullanam, Kootumoochi, Mathapuzha, touching Mathapuzha Angadi, Paruthikkad, Sobhana, Athani, Kottakkadavu, Mannur, Kodinhi, Chenkkalangadi, Alungal, Kadakkattupara, Olipram, Kadavu, Chettippadi, Anangadi without touching Rly Station with halt at Koottumoochi as ordinary service by this authority held on 30.05.2017 in item no. 8. This authority has considered the application as per law and verified connected records; also perused the directions contained in various judgments of Hon. High Court of Kerala. RTA held on 30.05.2017 in item no. 8 granted a regular stage carriage permit to the applicant subject to settlement of timings and production of a suitable stage carriage within 30 days of dispatch of the proceedings. The same was dispatched on 18.08.2017. Further on 14.09.2017, she has submitted for maximum time to produce the vehicle as per Rule 159 of KMVR 1989. The request has been considered. Again, the applicant has filed a writ petition before the Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP (C) No. 32908 of 2018 requesting for a direction to this authority to mark the granted permit for the timing conference without a vehicle. Hon. Court in its Judgment dtd.25.10.2017 directed the applicant to produce the current records at the earliest and also directed this authority to conduct the timing conference within six weeks. In obedience to the direction from Hon. Court, the applicant has produced the current records of the vehicle KL 10 Q 9881 for endorsing the granted permit. The vehicle is age old and it was a 2003 model stage carriage and which is accepted by this authority. Another operator, Sri. Veerankutty has filed another writ petition before the Hon. Court in WP(C) 8572 stating that the produced vehicle cannot be accepted in the light of the decision taken by STA dated 14.06.2017 that a permit can be granted only to a stage carriage with less than eight years of age. However, the permit is already granted by RTA subject to settlement of timings on 30.05.2017. The condition was imposed on 14.06.2017 by the STA. Hence we are of the view that there is no need to impose this condition to an already granted permit. Hence there is nothing illegal or arbitrary in accepting the current records of the stage carriage as directed by Hon. High Court of Kerala. Thus a timing conference was scheduled for 01.03.2018 and later postponed to 17.03.2018. The same was conducted and settled the timings amicably on 17.03.2018. However, as per the interim order of Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) 8572, the proceedings were not issued as on date. Now the request for allowing maximum time by the grantee of the permit submitted on 14.09.2017 for producing the current records of a suitable vehicle to endorse the granted permit is placed before this authority for approval. The proceedings of this authority held on 30.05.2017 was dispatched on 18.08.2017. Further on 14.09.2017, the grantee of the

11 RTA -19.04.2018 permit has submitted a request for maximum time to produce the current records of a suitable vehicle as per Rule 159 of KMVR 1989. We have considered the request in the light of the conditions stipulated in KMVR 159 (2) and maximum time of four months in aggregate is granted from the date of communication of the decision of RTA held on 30.05.2017. As per records, the decision was communicated to the applicant on 18.08.2017, and hence four months’ time is allowed for the production of current records of a suitable vehicle from 18.08.2017. Item No. 17 Heard. This is to reconsider the application for variation of permit in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 56 N 9606 (old vehicle number KL 10 T 727) on the route Puthuparamba - Kottapuram via Kottakkal and Indianoor Regular Permit 10/11/2001 valid up to 18/01/2021 with the strength of judgment from Hon’ble S.T.A.T Ernakulam vide order no M.V.A.A No. 112/2017 dated 27/10/2017.The permit holder applied for regular extension from Puthuparamba to Puthanangadi via Karattangadi, Manjamad Palam and Mini Bazar as Ordinary Service on the existing regular route Puthuparamba- Kottappuram. This application was placed before this authority held on 25/01/2017 and rejected. Now the permit holder has produced a judgment from Hon’ble S.T.A.T Ernakulam vide order no M.V.A.A No. 112/2017 dated 27/10/2017 which directs the RTA to consider the matter afresh and pass the order with in a period of four months from the date of receipts of the copy of this judgment. This authority has re-considered the application, perused the directions contained in the Judgment of STAT; verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes.

12 RTA -19.04.2018 As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.18 Heard. This is to consider the application for regular variation in respect of the vehicle KL 03 P 4695 , operating on the route, Kalikavu-Wandoor –Pookkottumpadam with halt at Panampoyil Via Maliyekkal, Udarmpoyil, Kalikavu, Puttamana, Anchachavadi, Vaniyambalam, Koorad, Kallamoola, Chokkad,Amarambalam, Ayilasseri and Panapoyil with Kalikavu-Emangad two single trips Via Thachankode, Parakulam with the strength of the Regular Permit vide Permit No. 10/3288/2017/M, valid from, has applied for regular variation of conditions of Permit so as to provide two additional single trips each between Vaniyambalam and Kalikavu Via Anchachavadi and between Kalikavu and Panampoil Via Maliyekkal, without curtailment on the existing regular route. This authority has considered the application, verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes.

13 RTA -19.04.2018 As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item no.19 Heard. This is to consider the application in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 50 B 3322 for variation of regular permit for curtailment of the portion of the route from Vazhikadav to Nadukani so as to operate Limited Stop in compliance to Government order 8/2017/Trans dtd 23.03.2017.The Stage Carriage KL 50 B 3322 is now operating on the route of Nadukani- Thrissur Via Vazhikadav Nilambur Wandoor Pandikkad Perinthalmana Pattambi Perumpilav Kunnamkulam as LSOS In the light of GO(P) No.06/2017/Tran dtd 15/03/2017 and GO(P) No.08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017, this authority considered the application for the renewal of permit in detail. Government of Kerala Vide G.O.[P] No.06/2017/Tran dtd 15/03/2017, amended the Rule 2[oa] of KMV Rules-1989 by inserting definition to Ordinary Limited Stop Service as fol­ lows. “Ordinary Limited Stop Service means a service, which is operated on a route hav­ ing a distance of not exceeding 140 Kilometres with limited number of stops, having at least one stop in every fare stage.” Thereafter on 23/03/2017, the Government of Kerala have modified GO(P) No.42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 vide GO(P) No.08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017. As per Clause [4] of the above notification, it is specified that the permits granted in the private sector as on 14/07/2009 will be permitted to operate as Ordinary or Ordinary Limited Stop Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2(oa) in the Kerala Motor Ve­ hicles Rules-1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstance. Stage carriage KL 50 B 3322 is operating on the route of Nadukani-Thrissur Via Vahikkadav, Nilambur, Wandoor, Pandikkad, Pattambi Perumpilav, Kun­ namkulam as LSOS. Regular permit (10/5190/94) in respect of the above Stage carriage is valid up to 29.03.2019. The permit holder applied for variation of regular permit for curtailment of the portion of the route from Vazhikadav to Nadukani so as to operate Lim­ ited Stop in compliance to Government order 8/2017/Trans dtd 23.03.2017. 14 RTA -19.04.2018 The matter was enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that Variation is only for curtailment from Vazhikadav to Nadukani. No new portion is originated. Existing route Vazhikadav Thrissur to overlaps with the notified route Kozhikode Vazhikadav from from Vazhikadav to Vadapuram and from Perinthalmanna to Kunnamkulam with Kozhikode Guruvayoor notification. Total distance of Variation is 15 Km. Variation does not violate section 80(3) of the MV act. Route length after curtailment will be 131.5 KM. No new portion is originated. Clause 19 of the G.O.(P) No 8/2017/Trans dtd 23.03.2017 is not violated. In this context, in obedience to the directions contained in the aforesaid notifications, requested variation is allowed subject to the condition that at least one stop has to be provided in every fare stage. The applicant has to submit a detailed list of stops in which he intends to stop the vehicle. Item No. 20 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from Hon’ble STAT in order No MVAA No 184/2016 and to re-consider the application for variation of permit in respect of the Stage Carriage KL-10 R 8181 on the route Thavannur – Changaramkulam via Ayankalam, Parappuram, Perumparamba, Nariparamba Pothanur, Thandalam Thattanpadi, Edappal, Kuttipuram halt at Parappuram as Ordinary Service which was rejected by RTA 11.07.16 vide item no 99 . Regular Permit is valid up to 03.07.2022. The permit holder applied for providing additional trip on the Edappal, Nariparamba sector and to deviate 5th single trip on the Edappal-Changaramkulam route from Naduvattam to Manthadam via Panthavoor on the existing regular route The application was already placed before the RTA held on 29.09.2015 vide Item No. 44 and also on 11.07.2016 vide item 99. This authority rejected the application stating that the applicant could not establish the need for variation as per clause 80 (3) of Motor Vehicles Act. Against the decision of this authority, the applicant has approached Hon. STAT and in order No MVAA No 184/2016, Hon. STAT has directed this authority to re- consider the application. This authority has re-considered the application, perused the directions contained in the Judgment of STAT; verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. 15 RTA -19.04.2018 As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes. As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.21 Heard. This is to consider the application for variation of permit in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 AJ 4446 on the route Perinthalmanna- Marutha Puzhakkadavu- Via Oruvambram- Pandikkad- Wandoor- Nilambur - Edakkara- Palad- Narivalamunda- And Mamankara- And deviation of the first single trip Via Vazhikkadavu Instead Of Narivala Munda. Regular Permit 10/622/2006 valid upto 19-12-2018. The permit holder applied for change of halting place from Perinthalmanna to Wandoor by providing additional single trip after existing regular service from Perinthalmanna to Wandoor and starting single trip from Wandoor to Perinthalmanna in the early morning before existing regular service on the existing route Perinthalmanna-Marutha Puzhzkkadavu on the existing regular route This authority has considered the application, verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh 16 RTA -19.04.2018 permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes. As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.22 Heard. This is to consider the application for variation Of permit in respect of the stage carriage KL 10 Z 4443 on the route Pookkottur- Kalikavu- Via Manjeri- Elamkur- Wandoor - Vaniyambalam-Kalikavu- Manjeri- Via Ayilassery- Amapoyil- Thuvvur- And Pandikkad as ordinary service. Regular Permit 10/114/1998 valid upto 15-03-2023. The permit holder applied for additional trip from Manjeri to Kizhakke Pandikaad Via Nellikkuth and Pandikkad and then extension from Kizhzkke Pandikkad to Thekkumpuram Via Pottiyodathal Karuvamparamba, and Edappatta (2 Single Trips)in the early morning without curtailment on the existing regular route. This authority has considered the application, verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes. 17 RTA -19.04.2018 As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.23 Heard. This is to consider the application for variation of permit in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 AH 531 on the route Pilakkal-Nellikunnu Via Kacheripadi Manjeri Cherani with Manjeri -Wandur one trip Via Kuttipara, Cherukulamthode, Peleppuram & Extend From Nellikunnu To Amayur (6 Trips) Halt At Peleppuram. Regular Permit 10/119/2001 valid upto 06-04-2021. The permit holder applied to extend the 3rd single trip (Pilakkal daparture time 7.10 am ,Manjeri daparture time 7.30 am from Nellikkunnu to Amayur and to change Pilakkal daparture time10.5. as 11.00 am and Manjeri daparture time 11.15 as 11.45 and 12.35 pm from Amayoor as 12.10 pm and 6.30 pm from Manjeri as 6.40 pm and Pilakkal daparture time 7.00 pm as 7.05 pm and Manjeri daparture time 8.15 pm as 7.40 pm on the existing regular route without curtailment. This authority has considered the application, verified the report of the enquiry officer and examined the connected files in detail. However, Government of Kerala has modified the Scheme notified under G O (P) No. 42/2009/Tran. Dtd. 14.07.2009 as per G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Clause (4) of the above modified scheme reads “the permits granted in the private sector as 14.07.2009 will be permitted to operate as ordinary or Limited Stop Ordinary Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2 (oa) in the KMVR 1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstances.” Also, as per the above notification, especially as per Clause 1 of the above notification, the scheme is applicable to all roués of Kerala. As per Clause 5 (c) of the notification, existing operators in the private sector as on 14.07.2009 are allowed to operate subject to modified clause 4 and 5 (b). Further, fresh permits will be granted to private stage carriages of other routes permitting them to overlap 5 Kms or 5% of the length of their own routes, whichever is less on the notified routes.

18 RTA -19.04.2018 As per clause 19 of the above notification, The State Transport Undertaking reserve the right to operate additional services or increase the number of trips on each of the notified routs. From the above clauses of the notification, variation of existing permits cannot be granted to the stage carriages operating presently in the state of Kerala. In these circumstances, application for variation as requested above is considered and we are of the opinion that this is a saved permit and hence the proposed variation cannot be granted under any circumstances as per the directions contained in the above mentioned sections of the notification G O (P) No.8/2017/Tran Dtd. 23.03.2017. Hence the application for variation of permit condition is rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Item No.24 Heard. This is to consider the belated renewal of permit application of the stage carriage KL 10 S 6102 on 20/02/2018 on the route Thirunavaya – Kanchippura Via Patternadakkavu and Athavanad touching Puthanathani via Patternadakkavu two Singles and Valancherry via Kanchipura two Singles. The permit (No.10/836/1997 was expired on 05/12/2017. The renewal application is submitted only on 20/02/2018 which was not in time. The permit holder has produced the Medical Certificate with a request to condone the delay occurred in filing the renewal application. This authority has verified the application and connected documents in detail. The delay occurred in submitting the renewal of permit application is condoned. However, the permit is inter-district in nature and the Secretary, RTA is permitted to renew the permit after getting an enquiry report from an officer not below the rank of a Motor Vehicle Inspector in his jurisdiction and after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit; subject to clearance of Government dues; departmental actions, if any and NOC from financier, if applicable. An amount Rs. 5000 has to be collected from the permit holder as fine for permit-less operation, if any. Item No.25 Heard. This is to re-consider the belated renewal of permit application submitted by the registered owner of the stage carriage KL 11 AA 5023 (previous vehicle KL 10 M 9149) on 26/08/2012 on the route - Parappanangadi via Kavilakkad, Mangalam, Alungal, Alathiyur, B P Angadi, Tirur, Tanur; halt at Tirur. The permit no.10/824/1997 was expired on 26/08/2012.

19 RTA -19.04.2018 The application had been placed before the RTA meeting held on 31/08/2017 and 24/10/2017 and adjourned for the detailed report with complete history of the application. The Secretary, RTA has submitted the following: 1 KL 10 M 9149 was covered by a regular permit 10/824/1997 which was expired on 26/08/2012; it was operating on the route Purathur – Parappanangadi via Kavilakkad, Mangalam, Alungal, Alathiyur, B P Angadi, Tirur, Tanur; Halt at Tirur. 2 Permit renewal application in respect of the s/c KL 10 M 9149 had been submit­ ted on 14/08/2012 vide receipt number 10/147664/2012. 3 The s/c KL 10 M 9149 was under G Form w.e.f 01/02/2011 to 31/03/2017 and G Form exempted up to 31/08/2016 on 14/10/2016. 4 Being the Vehicle was under G Form the permit renewal application was not pro­ cessed, records were not updated. 5 On 13/10/2015, KL 10 M 9149 was replaced by KL 11 AA 5023, vide receipt number 10/153619/2015 dated 22/09/2015. Now KL 11 AA 5023 is operating service on this route with Temporary permit u/s 87(1) d, temporary permit is valid up to 19/04/2018. 6 Since the vehicle KL 10 M 9149 was replaced by KL 11 AA 5023, second time per­ mit renewal application had been submitted in respect of the s/c KL 11 AA 5023 vide receipt number 10/142065/2018 dated 19/08/2017. This authority has considered the renewal applications verified connected records and re­ lated documents in detail: The validity of regular permit was expired on 26.08.2012; the application was submitted in time and a ready vehicle is available to endorse the permit. Since the vehicle KL 10 M 9149 was replaced by KL 11 AA 5023 and the permit is operating with temporary permit u/s 87(1) d, this authority is of the view that the service of the vehicle has to be contin­ ued. In this context, the Secretary RTA is permitted to renew the regular permit no 10/824/1997 from 27.08.2012 to 26.08.2017 and 27.08.2017 to 26.08.2022, after get­ ting an enquiry report from an officer not below the rank of a Motor Vehicle Inspector in his jurisdiction and after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit; subject to clearance of Government dues and departmental actions if any and NOC from the fi­ nancier, if applicable. Item No. 26 Heard. This is to consider the renewal of permit application submitted by the registered owner of the stage carriage KL 10 R 3937 on 25/1/2018 on the route Devadhar Higher Secondary School – Kavilakkad as ordinary service. The permit No. 10/879/2013 was 20 RTA -19.04.2018 expired on 10/02/2018. This authority considered the application and verified connected files and records. Portion of the route from Devadhar Higher secondary school to- Chammravattom overlaps with Ponnani –Chelari notified route vide G.O (P) No 79/2015 Trans dtd 08/12/15. Upon verification of records, o route enquiry report is available to verify whether the said permit is renewable or not. In this context, the Secretary, RTA will conduct a detailed enquiry on the matter and report whether the permit is renewable or not in the light of the directions contained in the final notification of Ponnani – Chelari notified scheme published as per G.O (P) No 79/2015 Trans dtd 08/12/15 and submit before this authority. Hence decision on this application is adjourned. Item No.27 Heard. This is to consider the belated renewal of permit application submitted by the permit holder of the stage carriage KL 10 R 8969 on 03/03/2018 on the route Kottumalaparamba- Kondotty – Madanchina – OKM Nagar as ordinary service. The permit No. 10/1373/2013 was expired on 01/03/2018. The renewal application is submitted only on 03/03/2018 which was not in time. The permit holder has produced the Medical Certificate with a request to condone the delay occurred in filing the renewal application. This authority has verified the application and connected documents in detail. The delay occurred in submitting the renewal of permit application is condoned. However, the permit is inter-district in nature and the Secretary, RTA is permitted to renew the permit after getting an enquiry report from an officer not below the rank of a Motor Vehicle Inspector in his jurisdiction and after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit; subject to clearance of Government dues and departmental actions if any and NOC from the financier, if applicable. An amount Rs. 5000 has to be collected as fine for permit-less operation, if any. Item No. 28 Heard. This to consider the renewal of permit application submitted by the registered owner of the stage carriage KL 55 7058 on 25/11/2016 on the route Tirur - Thrissur as LSOS. The permit no. 10/8121/2001 was expired on 19/12/2016. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after getting an enquiry report from an officer not below the rank of a Motor Vehicle Inspector in his juris­ diction and after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the noti­ fied routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal

21 RTA -19.04.2018 impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.29 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal of stage carriage permit in respect of the stage carriage, KL 05 X 9189, operating on the route, Manjeri-Kozhikode as LSOS, vide Permit No. 10/210/1998/M, which was valid from 16.03.2013 to 15.03.2018. The Permit holder applied for the renewal of the permit, on 09.03.2018, for a further period of 05 years. But, the application is not in time. He has requested to condone the delay occurred in submitting the renewal application in time. He has produced Medical Certificate dated.11.03.2018 which states that he was under treatment for the period from 20.02.2018 to 11.03.2018. The route lies under general concurrence. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the per­ mit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.30 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal of permit in respect of the stage carriage, KL 55 F 4242 (replaced by KL 10 AD 4414), operating on the route, Manjeri-Karulai touching Vazhikkadavu Via Pathappiriyam, Edavanna, Nilambur and Mukkattta, vide Permit No. 10/613/1998/M, which was valid from 26.03.2013 to 25.03.2018 The permit holder applied for the renewal of the permit on 12.03.2018, for a further period of 05 years. But, the application is not in time. Now the vehicle is operating with the Strength of Temporary Permit valid from 19.03.2018 to 18.07.2018 u/s 87(1) d. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records in detail. Secretary, RTA is permitted to renew the permit after verifying whether the route objec­ tionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clear­ ance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.31 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal of stage carriage permit (10/6320/97) valid up to 05.12.2017 in respect of stage carriage KL 65 A 3545 on the route of Kalkundu -Kozhikode Medical College as LSOS. 22 RTA -19.04.2018 The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 25.11.2017. Permit holder has submitted a medical certificate for condone the delay. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the per­ mit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.32 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal of stage carriage permit (10/5130/2003) valid upto 27.02.2018 in respect of stage carriage KL 54 B 7542 on the route of Kolalamba –Kuttipuram as LSOS. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 15.02.2018. No departmental action is pending in Office This authority has considered the application and verified connected records in detail. Secretary, RTA is permitted to renew the permit after verifying whether the route objec­ tionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clear­ ance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.33 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No 4187 of 2017 dtd 07.02.2018 and to consider the belated applications for renewal of stage carriage permit (10/527/98) valid up to 07.02.2018 in respect of stage carriage KL 07 AC 1634 and also for the replacement of vehicle by a later model Stage Carriage KL 49 8686 on the route of -Kuttipuram as LSOS. This authority has considered the applications; perused the directions contained in the judgment and verified connected records and files. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 29.01.2018, which is on time. Vehicle has been under G form w e f 01.12.2013. Thus, upon verification of connected records it is revealed that the stage carriage is not operational from 01.12.2013. No valid and sustainable reason for making the permit operational was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational for more than four and half years. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. Thus, we are of the common view that the very purpose

23 RTA -19.04.2018 of issuing the permit was defeated and the holder of the permit cannot be considered as a bonafide operator with adequate financial stability. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and/or keeping the vehicle for continued service of the issued permit, this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. Also, we are of the view that the very object of renewal of a permit is for the continued operation of service and in this case there is the permit is not operational for more than four years. Thus this authority could not find any single reason to renew the permit which has been kept idle for such a long period without any benefit to common public. Hence application for renewal of permit submitted by the registered owner of the stage carriage KL 07 AC 1634 is considered and rejected. Further, on 10.08.2017 permit holder submitted a request for replacing the regular permit by a later model stage Carriage KL 49 8686 without any prescribed fee. He also submitted a Judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 4187 of 2018 dtd 07.02.2018 and which reads “there will be direction to second respondent to consider the application for renewal prior to the consideration of the application for replacement within a period of two weeks.” This authority has considered the application for renewal as per the direction from Hon. High Court. Since the application for renewal is rejected subsequently the application for replacement also rejected. Item No.34 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of Stage Carriage permit (10/61/98) valid up to 22.01.2018 in respect of Stage Carriage KL 08 AT 5859 operating on the route Kozhikode -Thrisur as LSOS. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records and files in detail. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 09.01.2018. Its having temporary permit U/S 87(1)d and its valid up to 21.05.2018. Portion of the route lies in Thrissur and Kozhikode districts. Permit issued in 1998. The matter enquired through MVI Malappuram and he has reported that the distance of the route lies in Thrissur district is 35 KM and in Kozhikode district is 16. The enquiry officer has further stated that the overlapping with notified routes /approved schemes are not objectionable as per GO(p) No. 8/17 dated 23.03.2017 clause 4 and 5 (b) in the case of renewal of an existing permit. Hence, the application for renewal of permit is granted subject to the clearance of Govt. dues, if any and NOC from the financier. Item No.35 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of Stage Carriage permit (10/519/93) valid up to 20.02.2017 in respect of Stage Carriage KL 52 E 306 operating 24 RTA -19.04.2018 on the route of Karuvarakundu –Kizhakkethala-Pallipuram Railway Station as ordinary service. This authority considered the application, verified connected files and records in detail. The permit renewal application was received from the above applicant on 03.11.2016. Its having temporary permit U/S 87(1)d and its valid up to 20.07.2018. Portion of the route lies in Palakkd district. Permit issued in 1993. The matter enquired through JRTO Pattambi and he has reported that the distance of the route lies in Palakkad district is 26.5 Kms. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.36 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of Stage Carriage permit (10/57/03) valid up to 07.01.2018 in respect of Stage Carriage KL 46 M 4347 operating on the route of Guruvayoor Kozhikode halt at Edappal as LSOS. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 11.12.2017.Its having temporary permit U/S 87(1)d and its valid up to 07.05.2018. Portion of the route lies in Thrissur and Kozhikode districts. Permit issued in 2003. The matter enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that distance of the route lies in Thrissur district is only 20 KM and in Kozhikode district is 17 Km. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.37 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of Stage Carriage permit (10/835/98) valid up to 20.05.2018 in respect of Stage Carriage KL 08 BE 3456 operating on the route of Guruvayoor -Kozhikode -Thrissur as LSOS. This authority has considered the application and verified the related documents in detail. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 10.01.2018. Portion of the route lies in Thrissur and Kozhikode districts. Permit issued in 2003. The

25 RTA -19.04.2018 matter enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that distance of the route lies in Thrissur district is 44 KM and in Kozhikode district is 16.5 Km. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.38 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of Stage Carriage permit (10/585/94) valid up to 03.02.2017 in respect of Stage Carriage KL 46 F 6854 operating on the route of Thrissur -Kozhikode as LSOS. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records and files. The permit renewal application received from the above applicant on 26.01.2017. Portion of the route lies in Thrissur and Kozhikode districts. Permit issued in 1994. The matter enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that distance of the route lies in Thrissur district is 35 KM and in Kozhikode district is 16 Km. And also reported that overlapping with notified routes/approved schemes are not objectionable as per G O (p) No. 8/17 Trans dtd 23.03.2017 clause 4 and 5 (b) in the case of renewal of an existing permit. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.39 Heard. This is to re-consider the application for renewal and regular variation of permit as LSOS which was adjourned by RTA 11.07.2016 vide item No 115 in respect of the stage carriage KL-08 AX 6799 operating on the route Thrissur-Kozhiode as Superfast. This authority has considered the application, verified connected files and documents. The matter was enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that the total distance of the route lies in Thrissur district is 35 Km and in Kozhikode district is 16 Km. Further, as per the report, overlapping with notified routes/approved schemes are not objectionable as per GO(P) No 8/2017 Trans dtd 23.03.2017 clause 4 and 5 (b) in the case of renewal of existing permit. Government of Kerala Vide GO[P] No.06/2017/Tran dtd 15/03/2017, amended the Rule 2[oa] of KMV Rules-1989 by inserting definition to Ordinary Limited Stop Service as fol­ lows. “Ordinary Limited Stop Service means a service, which is operated on a route hav­

26 RTA -19.04.2018 ing a distance of not exceeding 140 Kilometres with limited number of stops, having at least one stop in every fare stage.” Thereafter on 23/03/2017, the Government of Kerala have modified GO(P) No.42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 vide GO(P) No.08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017. As per Clause [4] of the above notification, it is specified that the permits granted in the private sector as on 14/07/2009 will be permitted to operate as Ordinary or Ordinary Limited Stop Service. The maximum distance prescribed in the rule 2(oa) in the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules-1989 shall apply to these saved permits provided that further extension or variation shall not be allowed under any circumstance. In this context, in obedience to the directions contained in the aforesaid notifications, requested variation is allowed as LSOS subject to the condition that at least one stop has to be provided in every fare stage. The applicant has to submit a detailed list of stops in which he intends to stop the vehicle. Further, this authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted as LSOS subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.40 Heard. This is to reconsider the application for renewal and regular variation of permit as LSOS which was adjourned by RTA 11.07.2016 vide item No 113 in respect of the Stage Carriage KL-08 BE 4699 operating on the route Kozhikode Thrissur as LSOS The regular superfast permit in respect of the stage carriage KL-08 BE 4699 issued on the route Thrissur expired on 23.06.2015. Now the stage carriage is operating service with temporary permit under section 87(1) d as LSOS valid up to 09.06.2018. On 28.05.2015 the permit holder had applied for renewal of permit for a further period of 5 more years. The matter was enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that total distance of the route lies in Kozhikode district is only 16 Km and in Trissur district is 35 Km. total distance of the route is 128 Km and also reported that overlapping with notified routes/approved schemes are not objectionable as per GO(P) No 8/2017 Trans dtd 23.03.17 clause 4 nd 5(b) in the case of renewal of an existing permit. In this context, in obedience to the directions contained in the aforesaid notifications, requested variation is allowed as LSOS subject to the condition that at least one stop has to be provided in every fare stage. The applicant has to submit a detailed list of stops in which he intends to stop the vehicle. Further, the renewal application of the permit is granted as LSOS subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable.

27 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.41 Heard. This is to re-consider the application for renewal and regular variation of permit as LSOS which was adjourned by RTA 11.07.2016 vide item No 119 in respect of the stage carriage Stage KL-46 G 5108 operating on the route Guruvayoor-Kozhikode as Superfast. The inter-district route permit was expired on 28.07.2013; On 05.07.2013 the permit holder of the stage carriage KL-46 G 5108 has applied for renewal of permit for a further period of 5 more years. Further, in accordance with GO (MS) No.45/2015 dtd 20/08/2015 and the minutes of the STA held on 18/11/2015, the permit holder applied for variation of permit as LSOS along with the prescribed fee receipt. The matter was enquired through MVI Malappuram and he had reported that total distance of the route lies in Kozhikode district is only 16 Km and in Trissur district is 20 Km. total distance of the route is 114.5 Km and also reported that overlapping with notified routes/approved schemes are not objectionable as per GO(P) No 8/2017 Trans dtd 23.03.17 clause 4 and 5(b) in the case of renewal of an existing permit. In this context, in obedience to the directions contained in the aforesaid notifications, requested variation is allowed as LSOS subject to the condition that at least one stop has to be provided in every fare stage. The applicant has to submit a detailed list of stops in which he intends to stop the vehicle. Further, this authority has considered the application for renewal of permit and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted as LSOS subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.42 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of the inter-district permit of stage carriage KL 10 AB 8354 (Now replaced to KL 10 AD 6608). Permit No.10/640/2002 expired on 01-09-2016 (TP U/S 87(1)d up to 01-07-2018) on the route Manjeri-Thrissur as LSOS. This authority has considered the application, verified connected files and documents in detail. As per the report received from secretary, RTA Thrissur, the route Manjeri- Thrissur lies 34 Kms in Thrissur district; in which, portion of the route from Perumbilavu to Thrissur - 28 Kms lies under notified sector. As per the report received from Joint Regional Transport Officer, Pattambi, portion of the route from Pulamanthole Bridge to Thanathara Bridge-26.5 Kms lies in the notified sector in the jurisdiction of Sister RTA, Palakkad. Thus, this authority has considered the application for renewal and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to 28 RTA -19.04.2018 renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.43 Heard. This is to consider the application for renewal of the inter district permit of stage carriage KL 10 AB 9719. Permit No.10/621/1989 expired on 22-02-2017 (Temporary permit u/s 87(1) d is valid up to 22-06-2018) on the inter-district route Manjeri- Guruvayur as LSOS. This authority has considered the application, verified connected records and documents in detail. As per the report received from Secretary, RTA Thrissur, portion of the route from Chalissery Bridge to Guruvayur lies in Thrissur district - 20 Kms. In which, portion from Perumbilavu to Kunnamkulam 5 kms lies under notified sector. Further, Joint Regional Transport Officer has reported that portion of the route from Pulamanthole Bridge to Thanathara Bridge lies in the notified portion and which is under the jurisdiction of Sister RTA, Palakkad. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records. The renewal application of the permit is granted. However issue of the permit will be after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Item No.44 Heard. This is to consider the replacement application of the stage carriage KL 10 P 6100 conducting service on the route Kottakkal – Koottayi as ordinary service with the strength of regular permit no. 10/8150/2001 valid from 25/01/2016 to 24/01/2021 after attaining an age of fifteen years on 04.12.2017 for the stage carriage KL 10 P 6100 with a later motel stage carriage KL 11 AL 7892. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 P 6100 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 P 6100 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 04.12.2017. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of

29 RTA -19.04.2018 travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect Item No.45 Heard. This is to consider the replacement application of the stage carriage KL 10 P 4434 conducting service on the route Tirur-Theyyala as ordinary service with the strength of regular permit vide 10/28/1998 valid from 13/04/2013 to 12/04/2018 after attaining an age of fifteen years on 01.11.2017 for the stage carriage KL 10 P 4434 with a later motel stage carriage KL 12 E 6768. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 P 4434 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 P 4434 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 01.11.2017. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect. 30 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.46 Heard. This is to consider the replacement application of the stage carriage KL 10 P 8780 conducting service on the route Murivazhakkal – Koottayi as ordinary service with the Strength of regular permit no. 10/813/1999 valid from 08/03/2014 to 07/03/2019 after attaining an age of fifteen years for the stage carriage KL 10 P 8780 on 16.01.2018 with a later motel stage carriage KL 10 Q 9307. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 P 8780 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 P 8780 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 16.01.2018. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport facility which has been plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect Item No.47 Heard. This is to consider the renewal and replacement application of the stage carriage KL 10 Q 6342 (previous vehicle number KL 10 K 7533) operating on the route Kottakkal – Koottai as ordinary service. Regular permit is valid from 09/02/2001 to 08/02/2006 (Expired) renewal application is pending. This authority has considered the application and verified connected files and records. 1 The renewal application for the regular permit of the stage carriage KL 10 Q 6342 which was expired on 08/02/2006 has submitted on 21/01/2006. 2 The renewal application for the period 09/02/2011 to 08/02/2016 was submitted on 04/10/2016 vide receipts no 10/160764/2016 dated 04/10/2016 which was not in time.

31 RTA -19.04.2018 3 Finally the renewal application for the period 09/02/2016 to 08/02/2021 was submitted on 08/12/2016 and which was also not in time. 4 The registered owner informed that the vehicle is under the custody of the financier due to the fail of remittance of finance installment. 5. Now the permit holder intend to operate the service with the vehicle KL 10 Q 2122 However he has not paid any fee for replacement. 6. NOC from financier was not produced. 7. Form-G filed w.e.f 01/04/2006 up to 31/03/2008 and exempted. 8. Form G was not filed w.e.f 01/04/2010. Tax for the period 01/04/2010 to 30/06/2017 an amount of Rs. 645918 has to be paid. 9. The permit holder has produced a judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 26853 of 2017, dtd 31/08/2017 which directs this authority to attain finality in accordance with law. The regular permit attached to the stage carriage KL 10 Q 6342 expired its validity way back in 2006. The application for renewal was submitted on time. Thus the permit was renewable at that point of time. However, the applicant was failed to produce the records of the vehicle and it was said to be attached by the financier for non-payment of installments. Again, the second and third renewal applications were delayed and has not submitted in time. There was also tax arrears of Rs. 645918/- for the said vehicle in which the permit was attached. Now the applicant has come with yet another vehicle KL 10 Q 2122 for renewing and endorsing the permit. This authority elaborately considered the application and verified connected files in detail. From the above facts it is obvious that the vehicle is not operating service from 09.02.2006. We are of the opinion that generally, renewal of stage carriage permits are issued for continues and uninterrupted operation of stage carriage service. In this case, there is absolutely no necessity to renew the permit which was almost expired twelve years back. This will not be beneficial for the common traveling public any more. The applicant himself stated that the original vehicle in which permit is attached is in the custody of the financier. Thus, the applicant is failed to continue the operation of stage carriage service from 09.02.2006. Thus, we are of the common opinion that the very purpose of issuance of the permit to the applicant is defeated. The said permit is not at all useful for the common travelling public. Things are being so, we are finding any single reason to grant the renewal applications as submitted by the applicant by condone the delay occurred for producing a vehicle to endorse the renewal of permits due to financial instability, laxity and utter irresponsibility by the applicant. As per clause (a) of sub- section (4) of Section 81, financial instability of the applicant is a clear condition for rejection of application for renewal of permit.

32 RTA -19.04.2018 In this context, this authority has also referred the observations made by Hon. High Court in a similar case in WP (C) No. 24250 of 2015 Dtd. 07.09.2015. By interpreting Rule 172 (2), Hon. Court has observed that ‘No application for renewal of permit would lie without the registration mark of the vehicle to be covered by the permit’. Hence even the very application for renewal submitted by the applicant is not maintainable at present. The validity of the regular permit attached to the stage carriage was expired on 08/02/2006 and the applicant is ceased to be a holder of a regular permit thereafter. Thus, this authority is of the opinion that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for renewing his permit and continue stage carriage operation from even twelve years back, this is against the provisions of KMVR 152. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for renewal as per clause (a) of sub-section (4) of Section 81 and also for replacement. Item No.48 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for replacement of permit in respect of the stage carriage, KL 10 Q 9955, kept under suspended animation, operating on the route, Mavoor-Keezhissery as ordinary service vide Permit no. 10/4119/2014/M, which was valid from 10.09.2014 to 09.09.2019 to a later model Stage Carriage KL 10 S 4203. The Stage Carriage KL 10 Q 9955, is covered by regular permit which is valid from 10.09.2014 to 09.09.2019. The permit holder applied for the issue of Clearance Certificate in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 Q 9955, without surrendering the Regular Permit and thereby keeping the Permit under suspended Animation in obedience to the direction from Hon. High Court of Kerala, in W.P.(C) No. 14245 of 2015(E), dated 12.05.2015. The Hon. Court has directed to issue the Clearance Certificate in respect of the Stage Carriage keeping the permit under suspended animation; accordingly, the Clearance Certificate was issued to the Stage Carriage KL 10 Q 9955. Now, after three years the permit holder has submitted an application on 05.03.2018, for the replacement of the above said suspended animation permit to the later model Stage Carriage, KL 10 S 4203. This authority has considered the application and verified connected files in details in view of the directions contained in the Judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala. Normally, a permit which is under suspended animation has to be replaced by another stage carriage within four months from the issue of clearance certificate. Now the permit holder has applied for replacement after three years. This authority is of the opinion that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacement his permit and this is against the provisions of KMVR 152. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is 33 RTA -19.04.2018 no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Item No.49 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal and replacement of regular stage carriage permit in respect of the stage carriage, KL 10 Q 565, vide Permit No. 10/618/1989/M, which was valid from 28.05.2012 to 27.05.2017, on the route University- Manjeri which has been kept under Suspended Animation. The Permit holder approached Hon. High Court of Kerala in W.P(C) No.10459 of 2013 (F), dated.,11.04.2013, for obtaining the Clearance Certificate in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 Q 565 without surrendering the above regular permit. Hon. court directed to issue the clearance certificate keeping the permit under suspended animation. Accordingly, Clearance Certificate issued to the Stage Carriage on 14.02.2014 keeping the permit under the suspended animation subjected to the condition that the permit shall be replaced within a period of four months from the date of issue of the Clearance Certificate. The Permit Holder has not submitted application for the replacement of the above suspended animation permit in time. Meanwhile, the Regular Permit expired on 28.05.2017. Now, the applicant has submitted application for the renewal of regular permit and replacement of the above expired suspended animation permit as on 01.02.2018, stating that he has acquired a stage Carriage bearing registration mark as KL 10 S 7028, which is registered as on 13.04.2004, with a seating capacity of 38 in all. He has requested to condone the delay occurred in submitting renewal application, stating that he could not submit the renewal application in time due to his illness. He has produced a Medical Certificate dated 02.07.2017, stating that he was under treatment and was advised rest, for the period from 22.05.2017 to 30.05.2017. This authority elaborately considered the application and connected files in detail. While, issuing the clearance certificate by keeping the live permit under suspended animation, this authority has made it clear that the permit should be replaced within four months from the date of issue of clearance certificate. The applicant has never tried to replace the live permit within the stipulated time period. This clearly shows the laxity and negligence of the permit holder to operate a stage carriage permit. Thus, we could not find any need to condone the delay occurred from the part of the permit holder to produce a vehicle for replacement. In this context, this authority has also referred the observations made by Hon. High Court in a similar case in WP (C) No. 24250 of 2015 Dtd. 07.09.2015. By interpreting Rule 172 (2), Hon. Court has observed that ‘No application for renewal of permit would lie without the registration mark of the vehicle to be covered by the permit’. Hence even the very application for renewal submitted by the applicant is not 34 RTA -19.04.2018 maintainable at present. The validity of the regular permit attached to the stage carriage was expired on 27.05.2017 and the applicant is ceased to be a holder of a regular permit thereafter. Thus the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for renewing his permit. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage this is against the provisions of KMVR 152. Hence this authority rejected the application for renewal and replacement. Item No.50 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment in W.P. (C) No. 4492 of 2018, dated. 16.02.2018 and hence to consider the belated application for replacement of permit in respect of the stage carriage, KL 10 N 7481, operating on the route Kondotty- Tirur as ordinary service, with permit no. 10/822/2001/M, which was valid from 07.02.2016 to 06.02.2021, to the later model Stage Carriage KL 17 E 4373, since, the registration validity of the route bus expired on 10.07.2017. The Permit holder approached the H’ble High Court of Kerala in W.P (C) No. 4492 of 2018, dated 16.02.2018. The Hon. High Court, disposed the petition by directing R.T.A. Malappuram, to consider the application for replacement and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the Petitioner and after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. This authority has considered the application and perused the directions contained in the judgment. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 N 7481 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 N 7481 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 10.07.2017, for about one year. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions

35 RTA -19.04.2018 explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect. Item No.51 Heard. This is to consider belated application for replacement of stage carriage KL 09 M 4717 with regular permit in respect of KL 37 A 1303 (10/68/2000) valid up to 27.01.2020 on the route of -Malappuram, as ordinary service; which has been under suspended animation as per the Judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 27304 of 2015 dtd 15.9.2015 w e f 27.11.2015. On 09.02.2018 permit holder has submitted application for replacement of the Stage Carriage Permit in respect of KL 37 A 1303(Yr of Mnfr is 2010 and seating capacity is 23) with a lesser model Stage Carriage KL 09 M 4717 (Yr of Mnfr is 2003 and seating capacity is 28). Now, after two and half years the permit holder has submitted an application on 09.02.2018, for the replacement of the above said suspended animation permit to the later model Stage Carriage, KL 09 M 4717. This authority has considered the application and verified connected files in details in view of the directions contained in the Judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala. Normally, a permit which is under suspended animation has to be replaced by another stage carriage within four months from the issue of clearance certificate. Now the permit holder has applied for replacement after three years. This authority is of the opinion that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacement his permit and this is against the provisions of KMVR 152. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Item No.52 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from the Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 5667 of 2018 dtd 14.03.2018. Also to consider the belated applications of renewal of permit w e f 10.07.2011 and the application for replacement of vehicle of the stage carriage in respect of KL 18 B 2592 with regular permit in respect of stage carriage KL 10 N 556 (C5/14/2006/M) expired on 09.07.2011 on the route of Kambram- Perinthalmanna. 36 RTA -19.04.2018 On 22.06.2011 Petitioner filed an application for renewal of permit on the above said route for the period of five years which was pending since the permit holder has requested that further action had not been taken regarding the renewal of permit at the time of personal hearing conducted by this authority. On 17.02.2018 Permit holder submitted another application for renewal of Permit on the above said route for further period of five years and also submitted an application for replacement of vehicle with a later model Stage Carriage KL 18 B 2592. The registration validity in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 N 556 expired on 16.02.2017. On 24.03.2018 Permit holder submitted a Judgment from Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 5667 of 2018 dtd 14.03.2018 with a direction to take up the petitioner’s applic­ ation for renewal of permit and replacement of the vehicle as preferred by the petitioner. This authority has perused the directions contained in the judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala and also considered the application for renewals and replacement. The regular permit with respect to the stage carriage KL 10 N 556 is expired on 09.07.2011 and the renewal application has submitted on time. The Secretary, RTA has submitted that the permit holder has requested not to proceed further on his application for renewal. How­ ever we could not observe any proceedings or letter given to the permit holder on this. As per the request of the permit holder, the Secretary RTA has not taken any further action on his renewal application. After about seven years on 17.02.2018, the applicant has submitted another application for renewal and replacement of the permit to his later model stage carriage KL 18 B 2592. We are of the opinion that the objective of an application for renewal of permit is for en­ suring continued operation of service. In this case, the applicant has submitted the ap­ plication for renewal in time and thus the application was renewable. However due to the laxity and non-responsiveness from the part of the permit holder the permit could not be renewed from 10.07.2011. The permit was not operational from that period to till date. The service was obviously not operational, from 10.07.2011 that is for more than seven years. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This is a clear violation of KMVR 152. It is also a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In this context, this authority has also referred the observations made by Hon. High Court of Kerala in a similar case in WP (C) No. 24250 of 2015 Dtd. 07.09.2015. By interpreting Rule 172 (2), Hon. Court has observed that ‘No application for renewal of permit would lie without the registration mark of the vehicle to be covered by the permit’. 37 RTA -19.04.2018 Hence even the very application for renewal submitted by the applicant is not maintainable at present. The validity of the regular permit attached to the stage carriage was expired long back on 09.07.2011 and the applicant is ceased to be a holder of a regular permit thereafter. The applicant has missed the opportunity to continue the service for the benefit of the public. Now, after seven years he has come up with another application for renewal and replacement. The act of the permit holder is against the provisions of KMVR 152. This authority is not convinced on the intention to operate a stage carriage service. In the light of the above findings and observations, we are of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for renewal and replacement. Item No.53 Heard. This is to consider the application for replacement of stage carriage KL 11 S 4527 with KL 10 M 7261 operating on the route Calicut University - Tirur as ordinary service since the registration validity of KL 10 M 7261 is expired on 28.11.2016. Regular Permit attached to the above vehicle vide No.10/4495/2016 is valid up to 21/09/2021. On 08/03/2018, the permit holder submitted an application to replace the expired vehicle to his own later model stage carriage KL 11 S 4527. The proposed incoming vehicle’s date of registration is 09-12-2003 and material difference is less than 25 percentages to old vehicle. This authority has considered the application for replacement and verified connected files and records. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 M 7261 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 M 7261 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 28.11.2016 that is for more than one and half years. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions

38 RTA -19.04.2018 explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect. Item No.54 Heard. This is to consider the application for replacement of vehicle KL 10 Y 527 with KL 10 M 7944 which has got a regular permit on the route Edavannapara - Mavoor as ordinary service. Regular permit attached to the stage carriage on the above route vide No.10/115/2004 is valid up to 18-07-2019. However registration validity of the vehicle expired on 08.01.2017. On 08/03/2018, the permit holder submitted an application to replace the expired vehicle to his own later model stage carriage KL 10 Y 527. The proposed incoming vehicle’s date of registration is 11-08-2018 and material difference is less than 25 percentages to old vehicle. This authority has considered the application for replacement and verified connected files and records. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 M 7944 is expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 M 7944 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 08.01.2017, for more than one year. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for

39 RTA -19.04.2018 replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect. Item No.55 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.56 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.57 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.58 Heard the learned counsel. The stage carriage KL 10 AV 6741 is operating with the strength of temporary permit. Hence, Transfer of permit allowed subject to the renewal of permit, the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.59 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.60 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No. 61 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.62 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.63 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No. 64 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.65 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any.

40 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.66 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.67 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.68 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.69 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.70 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.71 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.72 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.73 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any and also subject to the renewal of the permit. Item No.74 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.75 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.76 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.77 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any.

41 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.78 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.79 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any Item No.80 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.81 Heard the learned counsel. The matter was enquired through the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Malappuram who has reported vide his enquiry report dated, 29.01.2018, that the transferee is financially sound to hold the permit and conduct the service satisfactorily in favour of the public and also that, the genuineness of the Application were ascertained by hearing both the Applicants in Person. Objections raised before this authority in this regard were considered and overruled as per law. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.82 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.83 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.84 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.85 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.86 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.87 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any.

42 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.88 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.89 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.90 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.91 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No. 92 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.93 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.94 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.95 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.96 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.97 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.98 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.99 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any.

43 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.100 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.101 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.102 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.103 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.104 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.105 Heard the learned counsel. Transfer of permit allowed subject to the production of no objection certificate from the financier, if applicable and clearance of Govt. dues, if any. Item No.106 Heard. This is to peruse the Judgment from the Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 7425 of 2018 dtd 06.03.2018 and to consider the request received from the permit holder for issue of clearance certificate in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 05 AD 3699 detaching it from the permit on the route Thrissur-Thalassery as LSOS without insisting for permit- less certificate. This authority considered the applications and perused the directions from Hon. High Court of Kerala. The Stage Carriage KL 05 AD 3699 is operating on the route of Thrisur- Thalassery as LSOS with temporary permit U/S 87(1) d up to 01.07.2018 as per the directions contained in WP(C) No. 14006 of 2017. Regular Permit (10/580/97) in respect of the above Stage Carriage as LSFP expired on 21.04.2017. Applications for renewal of permit and variation of class of service as LSOS are considered adjourned the decision by this authority held on 30.05.2017 in item no 36 for want of concurrence from sister RTA’s. This is a request for issuance of clearance certificate without insisting for surrender of the existing regular permit. It is also learnt from connected files that the validity of regular permit is already expired and the renewal application is under process of this authority. Hence we are of the opinion that the very application for withdrawal of vehicle from the permit is not maintainable. Also, in a Judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala in WA Nos. 2486, 2455 and 2769 of 2015; Dtd. 06.04.2016 clearly pointed out that issuance of 44 RTA -19.04.2018 clearance certificate by keeping the permit alive is contrary to the object and purpose of the 1988 Motor Vehicles Act and the 1989 KMV Rules. In this context, the application for issuance of permit less/clearance certificate to the stage carriage KL 05 AD 3699 by keeping the permit alive is considered and rejected. Item No.107 This is to consider the application for Bus Shelter at Chattipparambu Junction submitted by Sevana Charitable Foundation, Chattipparamba. This authority considered the application and verified connected records including the report of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Sub- Regional Transport Office, Perinthalmanna. As per the report, he has suggested to shift the existing bus stop to 500 Mts away from the Junction towards Malappuram and suggested for the construction of a bus shelter. However, we are of the opinion that this matter involves a much deeper understanding of the present situation, especially a detailed analysis of the present situation and also the pros and cons of the requested shift in bus stop; so that this authority can take a right approach on the request. Moreover this matter needs a recommendation from the local traffic regulatory committee. For the construction of a bus shelter, concurrence from the concerned local self Govt. institution and also from the Public Works Department (Roads) is essential. In the light of the above observations, place the application before this authority with a recommendation from the concerned local traffic regulatory committee. Hence, decision on this application is adjourned. Item No.108 This is to consider the application for re-construction of Bus Shelters at Kavungal, Kizhakkethala, Munduparambu, Near to ‘Passport Seva Kendram’ in Malappuram Municipal limits. This authority considered the matter in detail, also verified connected records and files including the report of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Malappuram. The chairperson, Malappuram Municipality has submitted a request for issuing a certificate stating that there are bus stops sanctioned at the above mentioned places for the purpose of re-constructing the bus shelters in these places as per the decision of traffic regulatory committee held on 15.12.2017 and the decision of Municipal council held on 20.12.2017 in Item no. 21. The matter was enquired by the Motor Vehicle Inspector, Malappuram and he has submitted that in all the above places sanction for bus shelters may be accorded in consultation with Public Works Department subject to the construction of a bus bay. In this circumstance sanction is accorded to re-construct the existing bus shelters available in the above said places as per prevailing rules and norms.

45 RTA -19.04.2018 Item No.109 This is to consider the application for a parking stand for Motor Cab at Changaramkulam Town submitted by Sri. Sherif M.K., Muthalamkunnath, Thakkidippuram, Ponnani. This authority considered the matter in detail, also verified connected records and files including the report of Motor Vehicle Inspector, Malappuram. As per the report, there is an existing stand for Taxi cars near to Thrissur – Kuttippuram road. Another stand for autorikshaws is also available nearby. There are yet another category of vehicles motor cabs (Taxi cars includes motor cabs also) and their major contention is that there is no parking space is earmarked for their vehicles. There are about 25 such auto-taxies are operating at Changaramkulam. They have also identified a place near-by which is owned by the local self government institution. In this context, this authority is of the view that the matter has to be presented before the local traffic regulatory committee and the respective traffic regulatory committee may enlighten this authority with their viewpoints on this matter. Hence decision on this application is adjourned. Item No.110 This is to peruse the order of Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 511 of 2018 (L) and also to consider the application for variation of permit in respect of autorikshaw KL 10 AD 180 changing the parking place from Areekode to Manjeri. This authority perused the directions contained in the aforesaid judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala and considered the application and connected records as per law. The application submitted by the petitioner is proper and regular. Also perused the directions contained in the Judgment of Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 511 of 2018; Dtd. 08.01.2018. As per the Judgment, the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala has directed this authority to accept the application submitted by the petitioner seeking alteration of conditions of permit issued to him and shall take a final decision on the same within one month, after providing a notice to the petitioner as well as Manjeri Municipality. The applicant was heard by this authority and also perused connected records in detail. This authority has also considered the findings of the enquiry report submitted by the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Malappuram. He has submitted that, since there are many educational institutions, major hospitals, commercial establishments are functioning in Manjeri Town, the roads in and around the town are always busy with town buses, goods vehicles, private vehicles and many other types of passenger vehicles. Traffic congestion and related accidents are a usual phenomenon in Manjeri town. However people at large depend upon Autorikshaws as an easy avenue of transportation. But, the process of earmarking Autorikshaw stands is still due in Manjeri Municipality. The direction of the Hon’ble High Court to keep a margin of 1.5 meter distance from the road, are not properly followed at present in the town due to lack of space and overcrowding of authorikshaw permits. Because of the widening of the roads from time to 46 RTA -19.04.2018 time, there is no room to park autorikshawas after leaving a margin of 1.5 M off the road. Most of the Autorikshaws are being parked on the road itself at present. This is often causing road accidents and even causalities at times. Out of the auto parks in Manjeri Municipality, only in three authoriksha stands situate fully off the road, while all other parks are situated either partially or fully on the road itself. It is for the authorities of Manjeri Municipality to set apart sufficient parking areas for Autorikshaws so that the vehicles can park off the road. Several discussions were held with the Municipal authorities to earmark parking stand for autoriskshaws in the town, but they have expressed their helplessness to find a suitable place for parking more vehicles. As per the request from the Secretary, RTA Malappuram Manjeri Municipal council has discussed the matter in their Municipal Council Meeting and informed that presently they were unable to find a suitable parking place for more autorikshawas. Thus, we are of the opinion that under the given circumstances, the condition will be worsened if more and more Autorikshaws are permitted to operate with designated auto parks. Further, from the permit conditions it is clear that the petitioner can operate his service including within Manjeri Municipal limit. But his plea is only to lift the condition imposed by this authority for idle parking. The condition for idle parking was imposed for avoiding further traffic congestions in the town, as the heart of the city was already saturated with vehicles, school and college students, and pedestrians as well. Rule 344, of KMV Rules 1989 empowers this authority to determine the location of a parking place for Autorikshaws and taxies in consultation with concerned authorities of any Corporation, Municipality or Panchayath; the Executive Engineer and with the District Police Chief. Thus, we have considered the application in its individual merit as per the direction of Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 511 of 2018; Dtd. 08.01.2018 and rejected. Additional Item No. 1 Heard the learned counsel. This is to re-consider the modified application for fresh stage carriage permit to operate on the route Manjeri – Edavannappara (via) Pokkolathur, Thrippanachi, Kizhisseri and Mundakkal as ordinary service in the light of the directions contained in the Judgment from Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 1049 of 2018 and also from Hon. State Transport Appellate Tribunal (STAT) in MVAA No. 72/2016 Dtd. 29.05.2017. This authority in its meeting held on 21.05.2015 in Item no. 30 has considered this application and the decision was adjourned for want of a specific enquiry report from Motor Vehicle Inspector. Meanwhile the applicant has extended the proposed route to Edavannappara to escape from the effect of notified scheme and re-submitted a modified proposal. Further, this authority has re-considered the application for regular permit submitted by the applicant, specific report of the Motor Vehicles Inspector and also the 47 RTA -19.04.2018 request of the applicant to modify the proposal were considered on 29.09.2015 in Item No. 12 and rejected the first application submitted by the applicant as per the observations contained in the specific enquiry report and disagreed to consider the modified application. Now, the applicant has produced a judgment from Hon. STAT in MVAA No. 72 /2016; 29.05.2017 which directs this authority to re-consider the modified proposal submitted by the applicant previously. Based on the directions contained in the Judgment from STAT, the application for regular stage carriage permit on the route Manjeri – Edavannappara submitted by the applicant was re-considered in detail by this authority held on 31.08.2017 in Item No. 1 and the decision was adjourned with a direction to modify the timing proposal in such a way that at least two more single trips to comparatively ill- served route Kizhisserri – Edavannappara. Against the decision of this authority the applicant has approached Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No. 1049 of 2018 and the Hon. High Court has directed the RTA to take a final decision in its meeting to be held in February 2018. As per the direction from Hon. High Court of Kerala further verified the application and connected files and documents and also considered the arguments raised for and against the regular permit application. It was observed that the applicant has not all considered the direction from this authority held on 31.08.2017 in Item No. 1. We have also considered the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017; Departmental Item No. 2 in which the authority has categorically stated that in order to apply and grant a fresh ordinary stage carriage permit, the applicant has to produce a stage carriage vehicle with age less than eight years. In this case, the applicant has not offered any vehicle for endorsing the fresh stage carriage permit at the time of application or even at the time of consideration of the application by this authority. In this context, as per the decision of STA held on 14.06.2017 in Departmental item 2 the application for fresh stage carriage permit is prima facie rejected without considering other merits and demerits of the application. Additional Item No. 2 Heard. This is to consider the request to endorse the variation of permit granted by this authority held on 26-10-2007 in item No.10 in respect of the Stage Carriage KL 10 AF 909 operating service on the route Kolakuth – Feroke as ordinary service. This authority has considered the application and verified connected files in detail. On 08-10 2007 the permit holder of the stage carriage KL 10 AF 909 has applied for variation of regular permit for extension from Kolakuth to Muthiraparamba (8 trips) without curtailment and without changing existing timings on the existing regular route Kolakuth - Feroke. R.S Via Idimoozhikkal, And Chungam. This authority has considered the application held on 26-10-2007 and granted the variation vide item No.10 and proceedings was issued vide no. C1/108030/2007 dtd 26- 48 RTA -19.04.2018 10-2007 subject to the settlement of timings and on condition that all trips are conducted to Muthiraparmba. An appeal has been filed before Hon. STAT vide no. MVAA 291/2008 under section 89 of MV Act to remove the rider in the decision of this authority imposing a condition that all trips should touch Muthiraparamba. However, the appellate Tribunal approved the decision of RTA and the appeal was dismissed on the grounds that the appeal does not have any merit. Even after the dismissal of the appeal the applicant did not submit the current record to endorse the granted variation. Very recently, on 15-02- 2018 the applicant has submitted a request to endorse the variation which is granted well enough ten years back. The applicant has further submitted that he did not press for the variation so far because the road from Kolakuth to Muthiraparamba was damaged and now the road is repaired. The Secretary, RTA further submitted that the applicant has filed A writ petition before Hon. High Court of Kerala in WP(C) No.12091/2018. This authority has considered the matter and verified connected files in detail. Since this is a matter which is under the consideration of Hon. High Court of Kerala, we are of the opinion that it is appropriate to take a decision after the disposal of the writ petition by the Hon. High court. Hence the decision on this application is adjourned. The secretary, RTA will place the matter before this authority after the disposal of the case by Hon. High Court of Kerala. Additional Item No. 3 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for renewal of permit in respect of the stage carriage KL 13 Z 639 (by lease agreement with the Stage Carriage KL 11 Q 8424), operating on the route Kozhikkode- Kalikavu vide Permit No. 10/610/2006/M, which was valid from 02.04.2013 to 01.04.2018. This authority has considered the application in detail and verified connected records in detail. The Permit holder has applied for the renewal of the Permit, on 22.03.2018, for a further period of 05 years. Since, the Permit is expired on 01.04.2018, the application for the renewal is not in time and he has requested to condone the delay occurred in submitting the renewal application in time. The permit holder has also applied for the renewal of Lease agreement for a further period of 11 months. Thus, Secretary, RTA is permitted to renew the permit after verifying whether the route objectionably overlaps with any of the notified routes as per directions contained vide G O (P) No. No. 42/2009/Tran dtd 14/07/2009 and G O (P) No. 08/2017/Tran dtd 23/03/2017 or there is any other legal impediment to renew the permit and also subject to the clearance of Government dues and NOC from the financier, if applicable. Secretary, RTA will ensure that a new replaced vehicle or a valid lease agreement endorsed in registration certificate of the vehicle is required at the time of renewal of the permit.

49 RTA -19.04.2018 Additional Item No. 4 Heard. This is to consider the belated application for replacement of permit in respect of the stage carriage KL 10 Q 648, operating on the route, Manjeri-Manjeri (Circular) as ordinary service; vide permit No.10/184/2001/M, which was valid from 22.11.2016 to 21.11.2021, to the later model Stage Carriage, KL 42 D 6992. The life of the Route bus, expired on 28.02.2018. This authority has considered the application and verified connected records and files in detail. Since the registration validity of the stage carriage KL 10 Q 648 has been expired, from the very same date the regular permit attached to the vehicle become invalid in the light of the very definition of ‘permit’ in the Motor Vehicles Act. A stage carriage permit cannot stand alone in vacuum. Obviously, the registered owner of KL 10 Q 648 ceased to be a permit holder from the very same date. It is not a sudden or immediate matter; rather the permit holder is aware of the date of expiry of registration well in advance precisely from the very first day of registration. No valid and sustainable reason for delay in submission of application for replacement was explained by the applicant before this authority. The service was obviously not operational, from 28.02.2018. No prior intimation or notice was submitted by the applicant on abrupt stoppage of the service. The permit holder has not made any alternative arrangement for the benefit of travelling public to overcome the difficulties caused due to the immediate withdrawal of a public transport which is plying service on the above route for many years. This authority is of the view that the applicant has intentionally missed the opportunity for replacing his permit with a new vehicle and this is against the provisions/conditions explained in KMVR 152. It is a clear violation of permit condition and comes under Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act. In the light of the above findings and observations, this authority is of the view that there is no necessity to condone the delay due to the intentional negligence and laxity of the applicant to operate a stage carriage. Hence this authority rejected the application for replacement. Further, the Secretary, RTA can initiate proceedings for cancellation of this permit as per Section 86 of Motor Vehicles Act with immediate effect. Departmental Item – 1 Ratified the decisions taken by the Secretary, RTA according to the Act and Rules

1. Shaji Joseph, Deputy Transport Commissioner (C Z 1); Member, RTA – Sd/-

2. Amit Meena IAS, District Collector; Chairman of RTA, Malappuram – Sd/-

50