Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 14TH ASWINA, 1944 PETITIONER/S: SETHUMADHAVAN K AGED 57 YEARS S/O. KRISHNARAJ, DEVI NILAYAM, VALLANGHY, NENMARA P.O., PIN 678 508, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV SAJU J.VALLYARA RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM - 678 001. 2 MUHAMMED SHAJI, S/O. ASHRAF, SHAJI MANZIL, NELLIPADAM, VALLANGY, NENMARA P.O., PIN- 678 508, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. OTHER PRESENT: JIMMY GEORGE - GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
=================== =================== Dated this the 6th day of October 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers; “ i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, directing the 1 st respondent to consider Ext.P3 objection submitted by the petitioner while conducting timing conference in respect of the 2nd respondent’s service pursuant to Ext.P2 proceedings; ii. Grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. ” (SIC)
2. The petitioner is conducting a regular stage
carriage service on the route Palamukku-Palakkad in respect of vehicle bearing registration No. KL-49 A 7020 with a set of settled timings. The 2 nd respondent was granted with a regular permit to operate on the route Nemmara - Coyalmannam-Chandapura subject to settlement of timings as per Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, most of the timings suggested are in clash with the petitioner’s service and he has objected in the meeting, but he could not submit a written objection. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 objection before the 1st respondent. The prayer in this writ petition for consideration of Ext.P3 objection.
3. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned Government Pleader.
4. After hearing both sides, I think the prayer in
this writ petition can be allowed. Therefore, this writ petition can be disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P3 objection submitted by the petitioner while settling the timing conference as per Ext.P2. Notice to 2 nd respondent is dispensed with in this writ petition. If the 2 nd respondent is aggrieved by this judgment, he is free to file review petition before this Court.
5. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with
the following directions; There will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider Ext.P3 objection submitted by the petitioner also while settling the timing conference as per Ext.P2. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE LU APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31566/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS : EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER IN RESPECT OF STAGE CARRIAGE KL-49-A-7020. EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD
HELD ON 08.06.2022 VIDE ITEM NO. 4.
EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 14.06.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. // True Copy // PA To Judge