High Court of KeralaWP(C)/35168/2014disposed of

Antony v. The Regional Transport Authority

2015-09-15Honourable Mr.Justice V.Chitambaresh4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/24TH BHADRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35168 of 2014 (U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

--------------------- ANTONY.M.D, 116, MATTAPPALLIL HOUSE, 8 T.V.PURAM.P.O, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS:

------------------------

1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM.

3. SUNNY ABRAHAM, THOTTICHIRA, PRIYADARSINI, VAIKOM KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVINDRAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 35168 of 2014 (U) ------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AGENDA OF THE RTA MEETING EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 6/11/2014 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15/12/2014 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF TIMING CONFERENCE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE

V. CHITAMBARESH, J --------------------------------------- W.P.(C). NO. 35168 OF 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of September, 2015

JUDGMENT

Ext. P3 order allowing variation of a regular permit is impugned. Ext. P3 order is very much revisable under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Moreover many factual and legal issues crop up for consideration alien to the writ jurisdiction.

Any revision filed against Ext. P3 order within three weeks from today shall be dealt with within a period of three months. The interim order already in vogue in this writ petition shall continue to operate for one month. The petitioner is free to apply for appropriate interim orders in the revision petition. 3.

The revision petition if any filed by the petitioner within the time granted as above will not be rejected as time barred. This is particularly so since the third respondent has no

W.P.(C). NO. 35168 OF 2014 - : 2 :- objection to this course.

Ext. P3 decision shall be followed up by the timing conference in case no revision is filed therefrom within the time permitted.

The writ petition is disposed of.

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE