← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/15870/2015disposed of

P.C. Abdulla v. The Secretary

2015-05-29Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MAY 2015/8TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 15870 of 2015 (G) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

----------------------- P.C. ABDULLA, S/O.MAMMU, SUBAIDA MANZIL, P.O THOLAMBARA, MALOOR, KUTHUPARAMBA, KANNUR.

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT :

---------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KANNUR- 670 001 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 15870 of 2015 (G) ----------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBITP1:

TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22.5.2015 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

NIL ---------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 15870 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of May, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The limited prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1, which was submitted by the petitioner for revision of timings.

2.

The petitioner is an existing operator on the route between Kannur - Iritty and the permit is issued in respect of stage carriage bearing Reg.No.KL-58A/5339. Presently, he is operating on the basis of the timings settled on 08.10.2013. The petitioner alleges that on account of introduction of increased number of services on the sector, the time gap available to the petitioner has been reduced and he is not in a position to conduct his service profitably. He further alleges that other services are getting a time gap of more than 30 minutes. His grievance is that though he has submitted Ext.P1

W.P.(C) No. 15870 of 2015 ..2..

application for revision of timings, no action has been taken by the respondent. Therefore, he prays for a direction to the respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P1.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. Considering the nature of the prayer, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

To facilitate an early action, the petitioner shall be at liberty to produce a copy of this judgment as well as a copy of this writ petition before the respondent at the earliest.

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-