Muhammed Rafeeq.A.K v. The Regional Transport Authority
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/20TH SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 23124 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):
-------------- MUHAMMED RAFEEQ.A.K, AGED 32 YEARS S/O. YOUSUF, AYAMKURUSSI HOUSE, KODATHI PADI MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI C.S MUHAMMED ASLAM, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. SULAIMAN, CHENKUTHANATHU HOUSE, KARIMBA P.O, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD BY ADV. SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY PALAKKAD PIN 678 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2. THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD PIN 678 001 * ADDL.R3 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. * ADDL.R3 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 7.8.2015.
R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.A. SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 23124 of 2015 (M) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------ EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT IN RESPECT OF THE STAGE CARRIAGE BEARING REGISTRATION NO KL-50/B-8682 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF REGULAR PERMIT DATED 06-05-2013 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR VARIATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 26-03EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 19-06-2015 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL ---------------------- TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE Scl.
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2015.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application for temporary permit. 2.
The petitioner alleges that the application for renewal of regular permit and for the variation of the conditions of the permit submitted by him as evidenced from Exts.P2 and P3 are pending consideration before the respondents. The petitioner now submitted an application for issue of temporary permit on the modified route between Palakkad and Kozhikode by avoiding the provision from Palakkad to Kanjikkode. Instead of avoiding any confusion, the petitioner requested to issue the temporary permit as limited stop ordinary service. Ext.P5 is the application for temporary permit. The second respondent is not issuing the temporary permit and hence the petitioner is constrained to garage his vehicle. Therefore, appropriate direction to the
-2second respondent to issue temporary permit as applied for by the petitioner is highly essential; it is alleged. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court. 3.
The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation was suo motu impleaded as additional third respondent. 4.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for the respondent corporation and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. 5.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in Ext.P5, the petitioner limited the route as Palakkad - Kozhikode for avoiding the portion from Palakkad to Kanjikode and so that the route would be within 140 kilometre and it would be a limited stop ordinary service.
Considering the entire circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's application within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording the petitioner and the third respondent KSRTC an opportunity of
-3being heard. If the third respondent does not appear on the date of hearing, it shall be open to the second respondent to proceed with the application submitted by the petitioner. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE Scl.