Disposed

Manikuttan @ Manikandan v. the District Collector

Kerala HC17 Feb 2014WP(C)/5349/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging decisions of Transport authorities regarding auto driver rallies. Instead of deciding merits, the Court directed the petitioner to file a revision under Section 90 MV Act 1988 within two weeks, instructing the RTO to treat it in time and dispose it within four months.

What did the court decide?

Retention of revision petition under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988; direction to RTO to treat as filed in time and dispose within four months.

Manikuttan @ Manikandan Vs the District… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/28TH MAGHA, 1935

¶5

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

MANIKUTTAN @ MANIKANDAN, SECRETARY, AUTORICKSHAW DRIVERS UNION (BMS), SASTHAMCOTTA PANACHAYATH UNIT, RESIDING AT ALAYIL KIZHAKKATHIL, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAMDISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.SUBASH CHANDRA BOSE

¶9

SRI.V.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-691013.

¶12

REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KOLLAM-691013.

¶13

THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), S.P.OFFICE, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691013.

¶14

THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER,

¶15

PWD (ROADS), SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶16

SASTHAMCOTTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, SASTHAMCOTTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶17

JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KUNNATHOOR, SOORANADU, KOLLAM.

¶18

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CIRCLE OFFICE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶19

TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHOOR, KOLLAM.

¶20

SHAHUL HAMEED, PROPRIETOR, CITY MEDICALS, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶21

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶22

10. C.KRISHNANKUTTY, SECRETARY, KERALA VYAPARIVYAVASAI EKOPANASAMITHY, SASTHAMCOTTA UNIT, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶23

Addl.11. AKBARSHA AGED 32, S/O.ZUBAIRKUTTY, KERALA CAFE BAKERY, SASTHAMCOTTA -690521.

¶24

Addl.12. P.H.SHYJU, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.P.K.HUSSAINARU KUNJU, VENAD LABORATORY, SASTHAMCOTTA- 690521.

¶25

Addl.13. RASHEED, AGED 46, S/O.ALIYAR KUNJU, CELL PLUS MOBILE CITY, SASTHAMCOTTA -690 521.

¶26

Addl.14. S.NIZAR , AGED 49, S/O.SYED MOHAMMED KUNJU, PADIPPURAYIL STORES, SASTHAMCOTTA -690 521.

¶27

Addl.15. JAYAKRISHNAN.R., AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI, CHIPPY BOOKS, SASTHAMCOTTA- 690 521.

¶28

Addl.16. ANCY.S. AGED 31, S/O.SHAJAHAN, ELITE CHAPPALS LAND, SASTHAMCOTTA -690 521.

¶29

ADDL. R11 TO R16 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.10.2013 IN IA 13657/2013.

¶30

Addl.17. TRAFFIC REGULATORY COMMITTEE, SASTHAMCOTTA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT, SASTHAMCOTTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶31

Addl.18. DISTRICT ROAD SAFETY COUNCIL, KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM -691013.

¶32

Addl.19. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOLLAM REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM -691013.

¶33

ADDL. R17 TO R19 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 21.10.2013 IN IA 13166/2013.

¶34

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶35

R1 TO R4, R6 TO R8 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE R10 BY ADVS. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

¶36

SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH R5 BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER (SR.) SRI.ANEESH JOSEPH BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW

¶37

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶38

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶39

APPENDIX

¶40

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS :

¶41

EXT-P1 COPY OF THE DRIVING LICENCE OF THE PETITIONER.

¶42

EXT-P2 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ATTACK ON AUTO DRIVERS IN PARKING THE AUTORIKSHAW IN THE AUTO STAND BY ANTI-SOCIAL ELEMENTS WITH THE TACIT SUPPORT OF POLICE OFFICERS AND TAHSILDAR AND UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF RESPONDENTS 9 AND 10.

¶43

EXT-P3 COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER AND REPLY RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT .

¶44

EXT-P4 COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER AND THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 8TH RESPONDENT.

¶45

EXT-P5 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24-11-2012 SENT TO RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7 AND OTHERS

¶46

EXT-P6 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28-12-2012,FROM THE OFFICE OF PANCHAYATH.

¶47

EXT-P7 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 4-1-2013 TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶48

EXT-P8 COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.22 OF 2013 OF THE SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION.

¶49

EXT-P9 COPY OF THE COUNTER WITH MINUTES PRODUCED BEFORE THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)31448 OF 2012.

¶50

EXT-P10 COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE WIDTH AND PARKING OF AUTORIKSHAW IN THE AREA.

¶51

EXT-P11 COPY OF THE MINUTES AND REPLY RECEIVED UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

¶52

EXT-P12 COPY OF THE LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE OFFICE OF 5TH RESPONDENT.

¶53

EXT-P13 COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE DISTRICT ROAD SAFETY COUNCIL, KOLLAM DATED 8.3.2013.

¶54

EXT-P14 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KOLLAM DATED 06.06.2013.

¶55

EXT-P16(A) COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE ALL PARTY MEETING HELD ON 04.08.2012.

¶56

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶57

EXT-P16(B) COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 05.01.2013.

¶58

EXT-P16(C) COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY 4TH PETITIONER’S WIFE.

¶59

EXT-P16(D) COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED FROM POLICE STATION ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P16(C).

¶60

EXT-P16(E) COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE S.I. OF POLICE, SASTHAMCOTTA.

¶61

EXT-P16(F) COPY OF THE RECEIPT ACKNOWLEDGING EXHIBIT P16(E).

¶62

EXT-P16(G) COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONERS AND ANOTHER.

¶63

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :

¶64

EXT-R6(A) COPY OF THE SKETCH SHOWING THE EARLIER LOCATION OF THE AUTO STAND AND THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED AUTO STAND.

¶65

EXT-R6(B) COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SAMITHY CONVENED ON 10.01.2013.

¶66

EXT-R6(C) COPY OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT AUTHORITY DECISION DATED 06.06.2013.

// True Copy //

P.A. To Judge

DSV/28/03

WP(C).No. 5349 of 2013 (P)

¶71

P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶72

--------------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 5349 of 2013

¶73

Dated this the 17^th day of February, 2014

¶74

J U D G M E N T

¶75

This writ petition was filed on 25.02.2013 challenging Exhibit P11 minutes of the Traffic Advisory Committee, Sasthamcotta. The decision taken by the Traffic Advisory Committee was approved by the Road Safety Council in the meeting held in the Chamber of the District Collector, Kollam who is also its Chairman on 08.03.2013 and the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam that met on 06.06.2013 approved the minutes of the Road Safety Council. The Regional Transport Authority, Kollam had also taken into account the petition filed by the Sasthamcotta Autorickshaw Drivers Union of which the petitioner is the Secretary. The writ petition was thereupon amended incorporating a challenge to Ext.P13 decision of the Road Safety Council and Ext.P14 decision of the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam. Under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988, the State Transport Appellate Tribunal is empowered to revise any order passed by the Regional Transport Authority against which no appeal lies. Though the period of limitation prescribed for filing a revision petition

¶76

W.P.(C) No. 5349 of 2013 2

¶77

is thirty days from the date of the order, the State Transport Appellate Tribunal is empowered to condone the delay if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by good and sufficient cause from making application in time. In the instant case, as stated earlier that the writ petition was filed on 25.02.2013 even before the Regional Transport Authority took the impugned decision. It was while the said writ petition was pending that the Regional Transport Authority took the impugned decision, no doubt, in the light of Exhibit P11 decision of the Traffic Advisory Committee and Exhibit P13 decision of the Road Safety Council. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that in the event of the petitioner filing a revision before the State Transport Appellant Tribunal within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the Regional Transport Authority should entertain the revision petition as one filed in time, issue notice to the respondents and dispose it of on the merits after affording both sides an opportunity of being heard.

¶78

I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction that in the event of the petitioner filing a revision petition before the State Transport Appellant Tribunal invoking its revisional jurisdiction under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the Regional

¶79

W.P.(C) No. 5349 of 2013

¶80

¶81

Transport Authority shall treat the revision petition as one filed within time, issue notice to the respondents in the revision petition and dispose of the revision petition on the merits expeditiously and in any event within an outer limit of four months from the date on which it is filed. It will be open to the petitioner to move the revisional authority for appropriate interim orders. If the petitioner does not take steps to implead the respondents in this writ petition as parties to the revision petition, it will be open to them to get themselves impleaded in the revision petition.

¶82

Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE

¶83

// True Copy //

¶84

P.A. To Judge

¶85

DSV/19/02

Manikuttan @ Manikandan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manikuttan @ Manikandan v. the District Collector

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

S.Manikandan Vs P.Venugopalan Nair

Joseph Mathew Vs Superintending Engineer

Sarojini Vs the Joint Director

Sunil Kumar C. Vs State of Kerala

Ramani Asokan Vs Kerala State Housing Board

Sr.Rose Cornelia Vs the District Collector