← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/20421/2015disposed of

P.K.Haneefa v. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Vadakara

2015-07-07Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2015/16TH ASHADHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 20421 of 2015 (C) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

----------------------- P.K.HANEEFA, PUTHENKAYYIL HOUSE, P.O.MELUR, KOYILANDY.

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT :

-------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA.PIN-670 101 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).No. 20421 of 2015 (C) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA DATED 30.10.2014 ISSUING REGULAR PERMIT TO THE PETITIONER ON THE ROUTE KOYILANDYPERAMBRA. EXHIBIT-P2:

TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER FOR REVISION OF TIMINGS OF HIS OWN SERVICE.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

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

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 20421 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 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.P2, which was submitted by the petitioner for revision of own timings.

2.

The petitioner is operating on the route between Koyilandy and Perambra. According to him, the present set of timings issued to his service is not conducive to operate with the present set of timings in public interest. Hence, the petitioner filed Ext.P2 application for revision of timings of his own service. Aggrieved by the non consideration of Ext.P2 by the respondent, the petitioner has approached this Court. 2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. Considering the nature of the prayer, the writ

W.P.(C) No. 20421 of 2015 ..2..

petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 after affording the petitioner and the affected parties, if any, 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/-