Disposed

Puthiyathoppilakath Ahammed Koya v. the Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC17 Dec 2012WP(C)/26216/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a petitioner challenging stage carriage permit violations by the fifth respondent. The Court directed the Secretary RTA to consider the specific complaint within two months and pass appropriate orders.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Secretary, RTA to consider and pass appropriate orders on the complaint within two months.

Puthiyathoppilakath Ahammed Koya Vs the Regional… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012/26TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 26216 of 2012 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PUTHIYATHOPPILAKATH AHAMMED KOYA, AGED 56 YEARS S/O. E. ABDULLA KOYA, PO PARAPPIL, THANGAL ROAD CALICUT-673 001.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶11

THE SECRETARY,

¶12

REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOZHIKODE-673020.

¶13

THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER

¶14

KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶15

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶16

CITY TRAFFIF POLICE, KOZHIKODE-673001.

¶17

SUNIL KUMAR.M. S/O. RAMAN, 22/505, MATHIRAT KUTTIYIL THAZHAM VALAYANAD, P.O. POKKUNNU, KOZHIKODE-673007.

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANITHA RAVINDRAN FOR R1 TO R4

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-12-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C).No. 26216 of 2012 (B)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶23

EXT.P1: TIMINGS ISSUED TO R5 SERVICE VEHICLE NO.KL-7-AG-3270. EXT.P2: COMPLAINT BEFORE R1 DTD. 23.8.2012.

¶24

EXT.P3: RECEIPT DTD. 24.8.2012.

¶25

EXT.P4: COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R2 DTD. 23.8.2012. EXT.P5: COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R3 DTD. 23.8.2012. EXT.P6: RECEIPT DTD. 24.8.2012. EXT.P7: COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R4 DTD. 23.8.2012. EXT.P8: INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C).NO.10226/2011 DTD. 31.3.2011. EXT.P9: INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C).NO.11187/2011 DTD. 7.4.2011.

¶26

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶27

// TRUE COPY //

¶28

P.A TO JUDGE.

¶29

HARUN-UL-RASHID, J.

¶30

W.P.(C).No.26216 Of 2012

¶31

Dated this the 17^th day of December, 2012.

¶32

J U D G M E N T

¶33

The writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶34

“To issue a writ of mandamus or any other writs, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to take immediate steps and avoid the violation of permit condition of the stage carriage operating the stage carriage service on the route Beypore - City - Kundungal - Bhat Road - Puthiyappa with KL-07-AG-3270, of the 5^th respondent so that it is corrected without curtailing trips to and fro Kundungal and other trips and to grant such other relief that are essential in the interest of justice” .

¶35

The 5^th respondent is the stage carriage permit holder

¶36

operating on the route Beypore - City - Kundungal - Bhat Road - Puthiyappa with stage carriage KL-07-AG-3270. The grievance of the petitioner is that the 5^th respondent is not operating his service following the timing issued to his service or operating full trips between Gandhi Nagar and Kuthukallu, that the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 complaint before the 1^st respondent, Secretary, RTA and Police authorities.

¶37

::2::

¶38

W.P.(C).No.26216 Of 2012

¶39

The learned Government Pleader on instructions

¶40

submits that Ext.P2 complaint will be considered by the Secretary RTA and appropriate decision will be taken without further delay.

¶41

In the facts and circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Secretary, RTA, to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 complaint within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶42

HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge.

¶43

bkn/-

Puthiyathoppilakath Ahammed Koya v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puthiyathoppilakath Ahammed Koya v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sambasivan Vs State of Kerala

Unity Combines Vs Recovery Officer

Raju Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Election Commission

Uzhuva Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs K.Rajendran

Rajeevan Keloth Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kannur

Sudheer Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority