George Cherian. Vs. the Regional Transport Authority. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
[mr. justice anand byrareddy, j.] this writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to call for the entire records concerning, connected with and relating to the order dated 23.07.1987 vide annexure-h peruse the same and set aside the order as unsustainable, particularly in the wake of the judgment and order dated 31.12.2002 by die learned civil judge (jr.dn) and jmfc, kanakapura in cc no.880/1986.1. the petitioners who are stage carriage operators operating on the route kottayam - ambayithode, with stage carriages bearing registration nos. kl-5/aa 8474 and kl 5/t 3699, filed this writ petition on being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering their requests for renewal of permits based on their applications and also non-consideration of their requests for conversion of the concerned services as `super express service''. according to the petitioners, the route length concerned is in excess of 140 kms. therefore, in terms of amendment to rule 2 as rule 2(ub) the petitioners have submitted ext.p1 application requesting for conversion of their services as `super express service', as well. however, the said application submitted by the petitioners is still pending consideration before the first respondent. in the said circumstances, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioners this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider ext.p1 application in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Judgment:
1. The petitioners who are stage carriage operators operating on the route Kottayam - Ambayithode, with stage carriages bearing registration Nos. KL-5/AA 8474 and KL 5/T 3699, filed this writ petition on being aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering their requests for renewal of permits based on their applications and also non-consideration of their requests for conversion of the concerned services as `Super Express Service''. According to the petitioners, the route length concerned is in excess of 140 Kms. Therefore, in terms of amendment to Rule 2 as Rule 2(ub) the petitioners have submitted Ext.P1 application requesting for conversion of their services as `Super Express Service', as well. However, the said application submitted by the petitioners is still pending consideration before the first respondent. In the said circumstances, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioners this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 application in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.