High Court of KeralaWP(C)/16859/2015disposed of

Nazeema Beegam K.N v. The Secretary

2015-06-10Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/20TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 16859 of 2015 (F) ---------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------- NAZEEMA BEEGAM K.N, W/O. IBRAHIM MUSTHAFA, UKKINI VEETTIL HOUSE, EDAVETTY P.O, THODUPUZHA.

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

---------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI - 685 602.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

mbr/

WP(C).No. 16859 of 2015 (F) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

------------------------------------- EXHBIIT P1 :

TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHBIIT P2 :

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO 13005 OF 2015 ISSUED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE mbr/

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16859 of 2015 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June, 2015.

JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent in issuing the clearance certificate, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

The petitioner is operating a stage carriage between Vettimattam and Thodupuzha and the permit belongs to the petitioner is endorsed to stage carriage No.KL-5/Q 8485. The petitioner alleges that his vehicle is not fit to operate due to its bad condition. Further, on account of introduction of KSRTC service on the notified route, the petitioner is not in a position to conduct service profitably. So the petitioner intends to replace the vehicle by another vehicle. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted an application before the respondent to issue clearance certificate to sell the vehicle without insisting the surrendering the existing permit, by retaining the permit under suspended animation. But the respondent has not

W.P.(C) No.16859 of 2015 -2granted the clearance certificate as sought by the petitioner. 3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. Considering the nature of the prayer and the nature of the submissions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 in the light of Ext.P2, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To facilitate an early action, it shall be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the writ petition as well as the copy of this judgment before the respondent at the earliest. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE Scl.