← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/17874/2015disposed of

Biju.D 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. 17874 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- BIJU.D, S/O.DASAN, BINDHU BHAVANAM, MELEVETTOOR P.O, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM.

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S):

------------------------ THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM 691 001.

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:

PJ

WP(C).No. 17874 of 2015 (H) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGULAR PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DT 28-03-2015 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C) NO 29134 OF 2014 RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 17874 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of June, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has come up before this Court for a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P2 application for temporary permit in the light of Ext.P3 judgment. 2.

The petitioner applied for regular permit on the route between Kallmbalam Market Junction and Mylodu. The petitioner alleges that though Ext.P1 application was submitted, on account of the non convening of the meeting of the RTA, the application was not boarded for consideration. Since the route applied for by the petitioner is ill served and grant of permit is beneficial to the travelling public, the petitioner also applied for a temporary permit on the same route as per Ext.P2. The petitioner points out that there is no objectionable overlapping of the notified sector and hence, there is no impediment in granting temporary permit. As the

W.P.(C) No. 17874 of 2015 ..2..

respondent has not granted and issued a temporary permit till date, the petitioner has approached this Court. 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.P2 in the light of Ext.P3 judgment within a period of two weeks 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.P2 application and Ext.P3 judgment before the respondent at the earliest.

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