High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17770/2015disposed of

Manidas v. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

2015-06-15Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/25TH JYAISHTA, 1937 WP(C).No. 17770 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------ MANIDAS, KUNNUVILA VEEDU, KARIMPALOOR, PUTHENKULAM.P.O KOLLAM.

BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT:

--------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANAPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM-691001.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 17770 of 2015 (U) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TIME SCHEDULE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S STAGE CARRIAGE KL-04/N 5052 EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.03.2015. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 17770 of 2015 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2015.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2 representation for his own timings.

The petitioner is operating between Paravoor and Kalluvathukkal on the strength of a regular permit issued to his stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-04/N 5052 with a time schedule approved by the respondent herein in a timing conference held in December, 2014. The petitioner alleges that he had while applying for the above regular permit proposed the vacant timings of a defaulted regular service, namely, KL-02/V 1952. The slots of the said defaulted service were available for allotment. However, while settling the timings of the service in December, 2014, the respondent alloted a time schedule quite different from the vacant timings proposed by the petitioner. This was unwarranted; it is

W.P.(C) No. 17770 of 2015 -2alleged. The petitioner further alleges that he has been operating on the basis of the newly alloted timings for the last more than six months now. During this period he has approached to the respondent to reconsider the matter afresh in the better interests of the traveling public. 3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. Considering the nature of the relief sought for, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P2, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, within a period of one month 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.