Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

P.Radhakrishnan Vs. State of Kerala

P.Radhakrishnan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 03, 2013
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1092548

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P.Radhakrishnan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....true copy of the communication dt.31.8.13. ext.r3(b): true copy of the communication dt.2.8.13. /true copy/ p.a to judge k.surendra mohan, j.----------------------------------------------------- w.p(c) nos.16907 of 2013-k, 19902/13-k16980of 2013-v and 19032 of 2013-d ---------------------------------------------------- dated this the 3rd october, 2013 judgment the disputes in all these cases relate to the location of an autorickshaw stand. the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties have put forward their contentions. they agree that the respective contentions can be directed to be considered by the regional transport authority, kottayam, after affording an opportunity of being heard to all the parties. in view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of directing the regional transport authority, kottayam, to consider the complaints made against the autorickshaw stand in question, to afford an opportunity of being heard to all interested parties and to pass final orders in the matter. orders in compliance with the above direction shall be issued, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. sd/- (k.surendra mohan, judge) rtr/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE3D DAY OF OCTOBER201311TH ASWINA, 1935 WP(C).No. 16907 of 2013 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------- 1. THOMAS THOMAS, KOLLAMKOMPIL HOUSE, MUNDAKKAYAM P.O2 RASHEED ASHARAF, KAPLANPARAMBIL, MUNDAKKAYAM.

3. ABDUL RAHIM K.S S/O K.A SAYED MOHAMMED, KAYAPLACKAL, R.P.C. P.O MUNDAKKAYAM. BY ADVS.SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ SRI.M.P.MUHAMMAD FAZIL SRI.N.RAJAN SMT.AUGNES LOVELY FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. MUNDAKKAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, (SPECIAL GRADE), REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNDAKKAYAM68651.

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-686 001. Addl.R3.NIBU MON.P.S. TWINKLE FANCY, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R4.WILSON.V.JOSEPH LIBERTY TRADERS, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R5.SIRAJUDHEEN.C.K. SIRAJ RUBBERS, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R6.P.M.VISWANATHAN MADHAVA GOLD, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R7.C.A.BABY CHOOLAKAPARAMBIL RUBBERS, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING NH220 MUNDAKKAYAM. WP(C).No. 16907 of 2013 (K) -:2:- Addl.R8.ALEX.K.THOMAS THOMSON COOL BAR, PUTHUPARAMBIL BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R9.SAJEEV PHILIP GOODWIN SHOE MART, DHANUANTHARI BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKKAYAM. Addl.R10.S.LALU SWEET HOUSE, RSP BUILDING, NH220MUNDAKAYAM. (ADDL. R3 TO R10 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER

DATED0108.2013 IN IA103032013) R1 BY ADV. SRI.LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM ADDL R3-R10 BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMBIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0310-2013, ALONG WITH WPC.16980/2013, WPC.19032/2013, WPC. 19902/2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 16907 of 2013 (K) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT APPEARED IN MADHAYAMAM DAILY DATED3006-2013. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

IN WPC NO74822007 DATED3003-2007. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED0307-2013. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE2D REPSONDENT DATED0307-2013. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNBOWLEDGEMENT ISSUED FOR EXHIBIT P3 FROM THE IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ISSUED FOR EXHIBIT P4 FROM THE2D RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE AUTORICKSHAW STAND INFRONT OF THE PETITIONERS' SHOP. EXHIBIT P7(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE AUTORICKSHAW STAND IN FRONT OF THE PETITIONERS' SHOP. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE3D PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DT.4.7.13 UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, FOR OBTAINING THE DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE SANCTIONING OF NEW AUTORICKSHAW STAND INSIDE THE MUNDAKKAYAM BUS STAND PREMISES. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DT.29.7.13 ISSUED BY R2 TO THE3D PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE RECORDS. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------- EXT.R1(a): COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

DT.8.4.13 IN WPC NO.4072/12 BEFORE THIS COURT. EXT.R1(b): COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE DT.13.5.13. EXCT.R1(c): COPY OF THE DECISION DATED3005.13 PASSED BY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM SANCTIONING THE AUTO RICKSHAW STAND AT MUNDAKKAYAM TOWN. EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.31.8.13. EXT.R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.2.8.13. /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

----------------------------------------------------- W.P(c) Nos.16907 of 2013-K, 19902/13-K16980of 2013-V and 19032 of 2013-D ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd October, 2013

JUDGMENT

The disputes in all these cases relate to the location of an Autorickshaw stand. The learned counsel appearing for the respective parties have put forward their contentions. They agree that the respective contentions can be directed to be considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam, after affording an opportunity of being heard to all the parties. In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are disposed of directing the Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam, to consider the complaints made against the Autorickshaw stand in question, to afford an opportunity of being heard to all interested parties and to pass final orders in the matter. Orders in compliance with the above direction shall be issued, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within a period of two months of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial