Allowed

Yahya Rawther v. the Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC20 Nov 2014WP(C)/2077/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside the Single Appellate Tribunal's order holding that the appellant misled the Tribunal by raising contentions regarding route curtailment contrary to the modified proposal previously sanctioned by the Regional Transport Authority, imposing a penalty for such deceit.

What did the court decide?

The order of the Tribunal dated 11.12.2012 is set aside and the 3rd respondent is imposed with exemplary cost of Rs.25,000.

Yahya Rawther Vs the Regional Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/29TH KARTHIKA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 2077 of 2013 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

YAHYA RAWTHER, AGED 55 YEARS, SHEEBA MANZIL, THEKKENADA P.O., VAIKOM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶11

2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.

¶12

3. K.P.JAYAPRAKASH, KOLLTU HOUSE, POOZHIKKAL P.O., VAIKOM - 686 141.

¶13

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.K.RAFEEQ

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

mbr/

¶16

WP(C).No. 2077 of 2013 (H)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29.01.2010.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2 : A TREU COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.12.2010 IN MVAA NO.241M OF 2010.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3 : A TRUE COPY OF THE MODIFIED PROPOSAL DATED 21.05.2011 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE COVERING LETTER DATED 7.1.2013 ISSUED UNDER THE RTI, ACT, 2005

¶22

EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE MVI, VAIKOM DATED 22.07.2011. EXHIBIT P5 : A TRUE COPY OF THE PRODEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 20.08.2011.

¶23

EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 27.10.2011.

¶24

EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF REVISION IN MVARP NO.402/2011.

¶25

EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.12.2012 IN MVARP NO.402/2011.

¶26

EXHIBIT P9 : A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.12.2009 IN WA NO.2877/2009.

¶27

EXHIBIT P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.12.2012.

¶28

EXHIBIT P11 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 14.01.2013.

¶29

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S. TO JUDGE

mbr/

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J

¶35

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.2077 of 2013

¶36

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

¶37

Dated this the 20^th day of November, 2014

¶38

J U D G M E N T

¶39

The petitioner is aggrieved with the order of STAT at Ext.P8, obtained by the 3^rd respondent. Though service was effected on the 3^rd respondent, the 3^rd respondent has chosen to remain ex-parte.

¶40

The short facts are that the petitioner is a rival operator of the 3^rd respondent. The 3^rd respondent had applied for variation, which variation included an extension as also curtailment in the route. The variation application itself was rejected by Ext.P1 since, the RTA found that the curtailment would adversely affect the existing travelling public. The 3^rd respondent filed an appeal in which there was a remand order. On remand, the 3^rd respondent had filed a modified proposal, which is evidenced at Ext.P3, which document has been produced by the petitioner being a reply to a query under the Right to Information Act. In the modified proposal, the 3^rd respondent gave up the prayer for curtailment and prayed only for the extension in the route. The report of the field

¶41

WPC.No.2077/2013

¶42

: 2 :

¶43

officer produced at Ext.P4 also indicates the same. The RTA having considered the variation, allowed the modified application, as is indicated in Ext.P5. The Secretary, RTA had settled the timings as per Ext.P6.

¶44

The 3^rd respondent, then approached the appellate tribunal, with a revision, challenging Ext.P6 timings settled on him. The contention in Ext.P7 was that the Secretary while considering the timings had not considered the curtailment and had merely allowed the variation. The Tribunal, going by the contentions raised by the 3^rd respondent, allowed the revision by setting aside the timings itself and directed the Secretary to consider the same fresh.

¶45

The petitioner is before this Court challenging Ext.P8 order of the Tribunal. Definitely, deceit was employed by the 3^rd respondent in approaching the Tribunal with a prayer for settlement of timings on the curtailment, while the 3^rd respondent himself had submitted a modified proposal before the RTA. It is also clear that it was the modification application, that was sanctioned when the variation was granted by the RTA. In such circumstance, Ext.P8 is set aside

¶46

WPC.No.2077/2013

¶47

: 3 :

¶48

and the 3^rd respondent is imposed with exemplary cost of Rs.25,000/-, to be paid to the Kerala Mediation and Reconciliation Centre which the Centre shall be entitled to recover from the 3^rd respondent resorting to the provisions of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act.

¶49

Registry shall send a copy of this judgment to the Director, Kerala Mediation and Reconciliation Centre, Ernakulam.

¶50

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶51

Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

¶52

jma

¶53

//true copy//

¶54

P.A to Judge

Yahya Rawther v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yahya Rawther 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Antony C.D. Vs Deputy Tahsildar

K.S.Viswanathan Vs Bajaj Allianz

Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd. Vs Sisupalan

K.S Leelamma Vs Mr.M.J Mathews

Shaji Kumar Vs Special Sale Officer

Textiles Worker'S Union (Aituc) Vs Alagappa Textiles (C) Mills