Nikath Narayanan vs the Secretary

Nikath Narayanan vs The Secretary

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 11, 2024

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1323147

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1323147
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh
Decided On: Apr 11, 2024
Case Number: WP(C)/14939/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nikath Narayanan

Respondent

The Secretary

Excerpt

.....this the 11th day of april, 2024 the petitioner is an existing stage carriage operatoron the route kayalode - kannur in respect of stage carriage no.kl-58s-4300. the timings of the petitioner's service were last settled on 15.11.2019. as per rule 145(7) of the kerala motor vehicles rules, changes in the number of permits as well as the time schedule of similarly placed services are sufficient circumstances warranting for revision of timings. the petitioner preferred a request for revision of timings of his own service by making slight changes to his service, but the same has not been considered. the writ:3: petition is for a direction to consider the request. in identically placed circumstances, this court directed to consider the request for revision of timings, contends the counsel for the petitioner.2. the petitioner submitted ext.p2 application for revision of timing. the writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent to consider the application for revision of timings.3. heard.4. it is evident that ext.p2 is an application forchange of timing which has statutory support. therefore, it is necessary that the competent authority considers ext.p2 in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. the writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondent-secretary, regional transport authority to :4: consider ext.p2 application submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision thereon, within a period of three months in accordance with law and after giving opportunity of hearing to the affected parties. sd/- n. nagaresh judge ams :5: appendix of wp(c) 14939/2024 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 true copy of the proceedings issuing timings to petitioner's service videorder no.v1/kl 58 s 4300/2019 dated15.11.2019. exhibit p2 true copy of the request submitted by the petitioner before the respondent dated 04.03.2024 along with the proposed timings.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 14939 OF 2024 PETITIONER: NIKATH NARAYANAN AGED 30 YEARS, S/O P.C. NARAYANAN, SREERAM NIVAS, KADAMBOOR, KANNUR, PIN - 670673. BY ADV LAVARAJ M.G. RESPONDENT: THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O., KANNUR - 670001. BY ADV.SMT.REKHA C NAIR, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :2:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024 The petitioner is an existing Stage Carriage operator

on the route Kayalode - Kannur in respect of Stage Carriage No.KL-58S-4300. The timings of the petitioner's service were last settled on 15.11.2019. As per Rule 145(7) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, changes in the number of permits as well as the time schedule of similarly placed services are sufficient circumstances warranting for revision of timings. The petitioner preferred a request for revision of timings of his own service by making slight changes to his service, but the same has not been considered. The writ

:3: petition is for a direction to consider the request. In identically placed circumstances, this Court directed to consider the request for revision of timings, contends the Counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application for revision of timing. The writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the respondent to consider the application for revision of timings.

3. Heard.

4. It is evident that Ext.P2 is an application for

change of timing which has statutory support. Therefore, it is necessary that the competent authority considers Ext.P2 in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the respondent-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority to :4: consider Ext.P2 application submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate decision thereon, within a period of three months in accordance with law and after giving opportunity of hearing to the affected parties. Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE ams :5: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14939/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUING TIMINGS TO PETITIONER'S SERVICE VIDE

ORDER NO.V1/KL 58 S 4300/2019 DATED

15.11.2019. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 04.03.2024 ALONG WITH THE PROPOSED TIMINGS.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2024 Same Parties Nikath Narayanan vs The Secretary Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice N.Nagaresh