← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/16819/2015disposed of

Mishal V.K. v. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

2015-06-05Honourable 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 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/15TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16819 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

----------------- MISHAL V.K., S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, VATTAKKANDATHIL HOUSE, VALIYAPRAMBA P O, KODUVALLY, KOZHIKODE.

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT:

--------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA 676505.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

PJ

WP(C).No. 16819 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD 5/5/2015 P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD 30/5/2015 P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO 33983/14 DTD 16/12/2014 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 16819 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Seeking for a direction from this Court against the respondent to issue varied permit granted by the RTA, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

2.

The petitioner is a permit holder on the route between Poozhithode and Kakkayam via Kozhikode in respect of stage carriage No.KL-13 G 1915. He preferred an application for variation of conditions of permit as early as in 2012, which was initially rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred a statutory appeal as MVAA No.93/2012, in which the rejection order was set aside and the matter was directed to be reconsidered. Accordingly, the variation was again considered and granted subject to settlement of timings. Since the variation was applied for in 2012, the petitioner preferred a request for settlement of timings with a proposed set of

W.P.(C) No. 16819 of 2015 ..2..

timings. The petitioner seeks a positive direction to the respondent in the light of Ext.P3 judgment.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

Considering the nature of the submission and the nature of the prayer, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 in the light of Ext.P3 judgment, 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 along with a copy of Ext.P3 before the respondent at the earliest.

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