Sajith Kumar M, vs the Secretary,

Sajith Kumar M, vs The Secretary,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jul 31, 2023

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1373002

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/1373002
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Murali Purushothaman
Decided On: Jul 31, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/22238/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sajith Kumar M,

Respondent

The Secretary,

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr.justice murali purushothaman monday, the 31st day of july 2023 / 9th sravana, 1945 petitioner: sajith kumar m, aged 49 years, s/o prabhakaran nair t., machingal house, vandumthara, mannengode p.o., koppam palakkad, pin - 679307 by adv i.dinesh menon respondent: the secretary, regional transport authority, regional transport office, civil station p.o., palakkad, pin - 678001 sri.sreejith -gp this writ petition (civil) having come up for admission on 31.07.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following:judgmentthis writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to consider ext.p2 request for revision of timings of the petitioner's own service operating on the route mulayankavu - meetna, in respect of stage carriage kl-51-k- 3400 within a time frame.2. the petitioner’s case is that even though he hadsubmitted ext.p2 request on 21.06.2023, requesting the respondent to revise the timings of the above vehicle, the same has not been considered. hence, this writ petition.3. heard sri.i.dinesh menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned government pleader appearing for the respondent.4. having considered the pleadings and materials andtaking note of the submissions of the petitioner that ext.p2 is pending consideration before the respondent, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider ext.p2 request in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, subject to the priority of pending applications as directed to be considered by this court and after hearing the petitioner and other affected parties, if any.the writ petition is disposed of. sd/- murali purushothaman anb judge appendix of wp(c) 22238/2023 petitioner exhibits exhibit p1 the true copy of the permit issued to the petitioner on the route mulayankavu - meetna dated 30.03.2023 exhibi

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JULY 2023 / 9TH SRAVANA, 1945 PETITIONER: SAJITH KUMAR M, AGED 49 YEARS, S/o PRABHAKARAN NAIR T., MACHINGAL HOUSE, VANDUMTHARA, MANNENGODE P.O., KOPPAM PALAKKAD, PIN - 679307 BY ADV I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT: THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O., PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001 SRI.SREEJITH -GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.07.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P2 request for revision of timings of the petitioner's own service operating on the route Mulayankavu - Meetna, in respect of stage carriage KL-51-K- 3400 within a time frame.

2. The petitioner’s case is that even though he had

submitted Ext.P2 request on 21.06.2023, requesting the respondent to revise the timings of the above vehicle, the same has not been considered. Hence, this writ petition.

3. Heard Sri.I.Dinesh Menon, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

4. Having considered the pleadings and materials and

taking note of the submissions of the petitioner that Ext.P2 is pending consideration before the respondent, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P2 request in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, subject to the priority of pending applications as directed to be considered by this Court and after hearing the petitioner and other affected parties, if any.

The writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN ANB JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22238/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON THE ROUTE MULAYANKAVU - MEETNA DATED 30.03.2023 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT ON 21.06.2023 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP[C] NO.16430/2023 DATED 31.05.2023

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Sajith Kumar M, vs The Secretary, Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Murali Purushothaman