This judgment addressed the petitioner's grievance regarding inordinate delay in implementing a revisional order allowing his application. The court directed the respondent to implement the decision within three months.
Direction to the first respondent to implement the decision in Exhibit P1 within a period of three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN
MONDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2007 / 25TH PAUSHA 1928
WP(C).No. 186 of 2007(V)
------------------------
PETITIONER:
------------
M.APPUKUTTAN PILLAI, S/O.MADHAVAN PILLAI, SRI. HARI, MEENADU, NEDUMGOLAM, PARAVOOR, KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN
RESPONDENTS:
-------------
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.M.A.FAYAZ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.R.RAMAN, J. ```````````````````````````
W.P.(C) NO. 186 OF 2007 ```````````````````````````
Dated this the 15th day of January, 2007
J U D G M E N T
The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of the fact that his revision was allowed by the STAT as per Exhibit P1 as early as on 26th October 2004, so far concurrence as sought for has not been granted . It appears that by Exhibit P2 the matter was considered in 2006. Even thereafter the matter was adjourned. There is no justification for the inordinate delay in giving effect to the revisional order, Exhibit P1.
Produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for information and compliance.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE
Rp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent is directed to implement a previous revisional order allowing the petitioner's application within three months due to inordinate delay?
M. Appukuttan Pillai
Regional Transport Authority, Pathanamthitta
Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Pathanamthitta
P.R. Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
