← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/23575/2015disposed of

Sudhamani v. The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

2015-08-12Honourable 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 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/21ST SRAVANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 23575 of 2015 (V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

----------------------- SUDHAMANI, W/O.DINESAN, CHIRAYIL HOUSE, PERINGARA P.O., MEPRAL, THIRUVALLA.

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

-------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 645.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.A.SANJEETHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 23575 of 2015 (V) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- P1- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGULAR PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH CHELAN.

P2- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WITH CHELAN.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

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

Msv/

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 23575 of 2015 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2015.

JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the non-issue of temporary permit by the respondent, the petitioner has come up before this Court. 2.

The petitioner alleges that he submitted an application for regular permit on the route between Chungapara and Thiruvalla, Mepral via Kallungal. The petitioner alleges that though Ext.P1 application was submitted, no effective steps have been taken by the respondent to place it before the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority. The inaction on the part of the respondent is causing great hardship to the petitioner. Since the application for regular permit has to be considered by the RTA and there is no meeting of the authority, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application for temporary permit on the route between Chungapara and Thiruvalla, Mepral via Kallungal. No decision has been taken by the respondent in the above

W.P.(C) No. 23575 of 2015 -2application. This is illegal and interference of this Court is absolutely necessary to protect the interests of the travelling public; it is alleged.

3.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader in the matter. Considering the nature of the submissions and the nature of the reliefs sought for, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on 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.