The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction not to revoke his driving licence and to quash a show cause notice. The court dismissed the petition as premature, holding that it was premature to challenge a notice while the opportunity to respond was pending and no adverse order was yet issued.
Writ petition dismissed as premature.
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 K.SURENDRA MOHAN
FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JULY 2012/5TH SRAVANA 1934
WP(C).No. 17715 of 2012 (L)
PETITIONER:
ARUN.P.A,, AGED 26 YEARS, S/O APPUNNI K.R, PUTHUKKAD, MATTUMMEL HOUSE, CHERANELLOOR P.O, KOCHI 34.
BY ADV. SRI.R.DIVAKARAN
RESPONDENTS:
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI G.GOPAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 17715 of 2012 (L)
A P P E N D I X
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
| EXT. P1 | TRUE ISSU |
COPY OF THE ED BY THE GEN |
SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE ERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. |
|---|---|---|---|
| EXT. P2 |
TRUE 31-0 |
COPY OF THE 7-2007. |
COURSE AND CONDUCT CERTIFICATE DATED |
| EXT. P3 | TRUE | COPY OF THE | ADMISSION CARD. |
| EXT. P4 | TRUE | COPY OF THE | SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 22-06-2012. |
| EXT. P5 | TRUE | COPY OF THE | REPLY NOTICE DATED 13-07-2012. |
/TRUE COPY/
P.A TO JUDGE
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
W.P(c) No.17715 of 2012-L
Dated this the 27th day of July, 2012
J U D G M E N T
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“(i) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, call for the records leading to the above case and directing the 4th respondent not to revoke the driving licence of the petitioner;
ii) To issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and quash Ext.P4;
iii) Grant any other appropriate relief, which is prayed by the petitioner during the course of hearing, and which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
to show that any action prejudicial to the petitioner has been taken by the authority concerned. It is not open to the petitioner
2
W.P(c) No.17715 of 2012-L
to challenge Ext.P4, which is only a show cause notice. The reliefs sought for are premature.
This Writ Petition is therefore dismissed as premature.
(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)
rtr/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging a show cause notice before the expiry of time to respond is maintainable.
Arun P.A
State of Kerala
Transport Commissioner
Deputy Transport Commissioner
Sub Regional Transport Officer
K Surendra Mohan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
