Dismissed

P.O.Augustine v. N.S.Sudarsanan Nair

Kerala HC9 Jul 2009WA/898/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal concerned a judgment directing K.S.R.T.C. to operate a bus via a specific route. The court held that while such operational decisions are generally not amenable to judicial review, the appellant remains free to challenge the route if it lacks a valid permit.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Appeal is dismissed. The appellant is left free to seek reliefs if the route is uncovered by a valid permit.

P.O.Augustine Vs N.S.Sudarsanan Nair — Company and Corporate | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 9TH JULY 2009 / 18TH ASHADHA 1931

¶5

WA.No. 898 of 2009()

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER IN R.P.23/2009 Dated 22/01/2009 FROM JUDGMENT IN WPC 28592/2008

¶7

APPELLANT: PETITIONER

¶8

P.O.AUGUSTINE, S/O.OUSEPH, AGED 65, PANDAMPADATHIL, VAYALA P.O., KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.C.CHARLES

¶10

RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS

¶11

¶12

N.S.SUDARSANAN NAIR, S/O.SREEDHARAN NAIR, AGED ABOUT 40, NEDIYAPALACKAL, ELACKAD, VAYALA KARA, VAYALA-686 587, PALA.

¶13

KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRIVADNRUM, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶14

DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, PALA, KOTTAYAM.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, STANDING COUNSEL K.S.R.T.C.- R2,R3

¶16

SRI. V.G. ARUN-R1 SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN-R1

¶17

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR

¶19

& C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.

¶20

--------------------------------------------W.A. NO. 898 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------

¶21

Dated this the 9^th day of July, 2009

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

¶24

The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.28592 of 2008. The Writ Petition was filed by the first respondent

¶25

herein. The dispute raised in that Writ Petition was concerning the operation of a K.S.R.T.C. bus from Pala to Ernakulam. The learned Single Judge directed to operate the bus via Kidangaoor, Kodallor market. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant herein filed R.P. No. 23 of 2009. That was dismissed by order dated 22.1.2009, noticing the submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the K.S.R.T.C. that the present route is more beneficial to the Corporation. Challenging the above judgment and the order in the Review Petition, this appeal is field.

¶26

The appellant submits that the present route, directed to be operated, is one not covered by a permit. Other contentions are also raised.

¶27

W.A. NO. 898/2009

¶28

¶29

Essentially, it is for the K.S.R.T.C. to decide through which route it should operate its buses. Such decisions of the K.S.R.T.C. are not normally amenable to judicial review by this Court. But, if the present route is not covered by a valid permit, the appellant will be free to bring it to the notice of the concerned authorities and seek reliefs. For doing that, the judgment under appeal or the order in the Review Petition will not stand in his way. We notice that the learned Judge ordered that the vehicle should be operated through Kidangaoor, Kodallor market, based on the finding that the K.S.R.T.C. has got permit on that route. If, there is no such permit, the competent authority will be free to take action on the representation, if any, filed by the appellant.

¶30

Subject to the above clarification, the Writ Appeal is dismissed.

¶31

(K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE

¶32

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE

sp/

W.A. NO. 898/2009

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.

W.A. NO.898/2009

JUDGMENT

9^th July, 2009

W.A. NO. 898/2009 4

P.O.Augustine v. N.S.Sudarsanan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.O.Augustine v. N.S.Sudarsanan Nair

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seenamol.K.R. Vs Pushpalatha

Kerala Tourism Development Corpn.Ltd Vs Shaji John

T.S.Rajamany Vs Dhanalakshmi Bank and 2 Others

Mehanas Shahul Vs State of Keala

Director of Tourism Vs M.G.Suseelan

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Vs K.a.Prakash