High Court of KeralaWP(C)/9198/2015dismissed

O. Raju v. The Secretary

2015-04-07Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2015/17TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 9198 of 2015 (Y) --------------------------- PETITIONER :

---------------------- O. RAJU PUTHENPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE, MATTOM P.O., MAVELIKKARA ALAPPUZHA.

BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S) :

----------------------------

1. THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN: 688 001.

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 688 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. R. RANJITH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-04-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Mn ...2/-

WP(C).No. 9198 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :

------------------------------------- EXT. P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL OF PERMIT APPLICATION DATED 2/3/2015.

EXT. P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE CHELAN RECEIPT DATED 2/3/2015. EXT. P3:

TRUE COPY OF THE DELAY OF CONDONATION PETITION DATED 2/3/2015.

EXT. P4:

TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION DATED 2/3/2015 ON THE ROUTE OACHIRA DB-THIRUVALLA WITH S/C KL 8/W 5359.

EXT. P5:

TRUE COPY OF THE CHELAN RECEIPT DATED 2/3/2015. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 9198 of 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated 7th April, 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved with the non consideration of a temporary permit application while the application for renewal is pending before the authority.

2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the permit itself got expired in the year 2001 and the renewal application now filed is delayed by about 14 years.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that there was an application filed within time and that the same was misplaced in the office of the authority. If that was so, the petitioner should have approached this Court within a reasonable time and ought to have specifically

WP(C).9198/15 raised such allegations.

4. Admittedly, the present application is filed after 14 years with delay condonation application. There is no ground for directing consideration of temporary permit application the renewal application of which, with a delay petition, is pending before the Regional Transport Authority.

The writ petition stands dismissed.

Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge Mrcs //True Copy//