High Court of KeralaWP(C)/5195/2015disposed of

V.Bhaskaran v. The Regional Transport Authority

2015-02-23Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/4TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 5195 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- V.BHASKARAN, S/O.E.NARAYANAN NAIR, KOLOT HOUSE, KOLATHUR P.O., KASARAGOD.

BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------- 1.

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-671121.

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, PIN-671121 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJU MEENATTOOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 5195 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS ----------------------------------- P1:

COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATE 13/5/14 FOR VARIATION OF PERMIT.

P2:

COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R1 DATED 27/5/14 P3:

COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE MOTOR VEHICLE INSPECTOR DATED 25/7/14 P4:

COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R1 DATED 25/9/14. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

===================== W.P.(C) No.5195 of 2015 - Y ====================== Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved by the adjournment of an application for variation for route in a regular permit. The petitioner sought for extension of 10 kms. The RTA sought for a report, which also is said to be in favour of the petitioner. However, later on, the application is seen to have been adjourned for the purpose of enabling the petitioner to submit a modified proposal.

2. The learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that, the variation involved is not only extension and takes in a curtailment also, which is against the public interest. In any event, the RTA would have to consider the application and if the curtailment is found to be against public interest, the application itself would have to be rejected. The consideration shall be made within a period

W.P.(C) No.5195 of 2015 - Y of one month from today. The RTA shall consider the same at the next RTA meeting and a decision shall be taken looking into all the factors.

The writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE SB // true copy // P.A to Judge