Allowed

The Secretary v. Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC23 Mar 2012WP(C)/6579/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a stage carriage operator, approached the Court alleging delay by the Regional Transport Authority in deciding his application for permit variation submitted in February 2011. The Court directed the Authority to consider the application along with the submitted modification in the next meeting and dispose of it within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Regional Transport Authority to consider the application for variation along with the modified proposal (Ext.P3) in the next meeting and pass orders within three months.

The Secretary Vs Regional Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MARCH 2012/3RD CHAITHRA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 6579 of 2012 (V)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THE SECRETARY, AGED 36 YEARS QUILON AUTOMOBILE EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, ADOOR

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM 691 001

¶11

2. THE SECRETARY,

¶12

REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOLLAM 691 001

¶13

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C).No. 6579 of 2012 (V) --------------------------

¶17

APPENDIX -------PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS ---------------------EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE ROUTE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MODIFIED PROPOSAL WITH SKETCH EXT.P4 COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD 8.12.2006 TO 7.12.2011 WITH ENDORSEMENT.

¶18

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------VK

/ TRUE COPY /

P.A. TO JUDGE

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶23

EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE ROUTE. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE MODIFIED PROPOSAL WITH SKETCH

¶24

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶25

P.N.RAVINDRAN,J.

¶26

----------------------------------W.P.(C) No.6579 of 2012

¶27

--------------------------------------Dated this the 23^rd day of March, 2012

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner is a stage carriage operator, operating a stage carriage service on the route Anayadi - Pathanamthitta via Bharanivau, Chittumala, Kundara Mukkada, Cheernkavu, Puthoor, Nediyavila, Puthanambalam, Kadampanadu, Mannadi, Adoor and Thatta on the strength of a regular permit. The permit was initially granted on 8.12.2006 and was renewed for a further period of five years from 7.12.2011 to 6.12.2016. Even before the permit was renewed with effect from 7.12.2011, the petitioner applied for variation of the permit by submitting an application in that regard on 11.2.2011. The application was taken up for consideration in the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority held on 6.6.2011. But in view of objections, it was adjourned and a report was called for from the Mobile Enforcement Squad of Kollam. This writ petition is filed contending that though more than six months have passed after the application was first considered on 6.6.2011, till date a final

¶30

W.P.(C) No.6579 of 2012

¶31

¶32

decision has not been taken on the application. It is stated that in view of the objections raised, the petitioner had submitted a modified proposal by submitting Ext.P3 representation dated 6.2.2012, that notwithstanding the modified proposal, the application for variation has not been taken up for consideration. In this writ petition the petitioner seeks a direction to the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam to consider his application for variation as modified by Ext.P3 and to take a final decision thereon within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶33

When the writ petition came up for hearing today, Sri.G.Gopakumar, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted on instructions that the petitioner's application for variation of the permit will be considered along with the modified proposal in Ext.P3 in the next meeting of the Regional Transport Authority itself.

¶34

In such circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam to take up the application for variation of the permit submitted by the petitioner along with the modified proposal set out in Ext.P3 and

¶35

W.P.(C) No.6579 of 2012

¶36

¶37

take an appropriate decision thereon in the next meeting of the Regional Transport Authority itself by including it as an item in the agenda and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously thereafter. In any case, the application shall be considered and

¶38

disposed of within an outer limit of three months from today.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE

¶41

/TRUE COPY/

¶42

P.A. To JUDGE

¶43

vpv

The Secretary v. Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Secretary v. Regional Transport Authority

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

M.L.Idikkula Vs B.Mohanan

Chinnamma Babukutty Vs the Regional Transport Officer

K.F.Sebastian Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative

Mohammed Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Velayudhan K.T. Vs State of Kerala

Chacko.T.K Vs S.Roopakala Jagath