Allowed

Ebrahimkutty v. the Secretary

Kerala HC3 Apr 2014WP(C)/5740/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a temporary permit. Petitioner clarified vehicle was withdrawn from another route. Court directed the respondent to consider the application and issue the permit within one week if no impediment exists.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's temporary permit application and issue it within one week, subject to no other impediment.

Ebrahimkutty Vs the Secretary — 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 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2014/13TH CHAITHRA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 5740 of 2014 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

EBRAHIMKUTTY, HARIS MANZIL, PALLISSERIKKAL.P.O, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM-691 001.

¶11

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY-691 001.

¶12

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-04-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Kss

¶15

WP(C).No. 5740 of 2014 (N)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶18

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE 4 MONTHS TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION DATED 20.2.2014 ON THE ROUTE SASTHAMCOTTA-PADANAYARKULANGARA WITH STAGE CARRIAGE KL 06/D 4488 IN PLACE OF KL 38/1816.

¶19

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE CHELAN RECEIPT DATED 20.2.2014.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶21

----------------------------------------N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J

¶26

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No. 5740 of 2014

¶27

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

¶28

Dated this the 3^rd day of April, 2014

¶29

J U D G M E N T

¶30

The petitioner only seeks for consideration of his Ext.P1 application for temporary permit in the route Sasthamcotta - Padanayarkulangara. The objection raised by the learned Government Pleader was that the vehicle, which is offered now to be operated in temporary permit sought for, by Ext.P1 is being operated in a temporary permit on another route. The petitioner, however, has filed an affidavit affirming that the vehicle was plied on a temporary permit in the route Padanayarkulangara-Kottarakkara in place of a regular permit vacancy and that the regular permit holder has resumed operation in the said route. In such circumstance, the petitioner has withdrawn the vehicle from that route and that is

¶31

WPC.No.5740/2014

¶32

: 2 :

¶33

offered along with Ext.P1.

¶34

In the above circumstance, it is only appropriate that the application for temporary permit be considered. In such circumstance, there shall be a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P1 application for temporary permit, in accordance with law, and if there is no other impediment, the same shall be issued, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶35

Writ petition disposed of.

¶36

Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE)

¶37

jma

¶38

//true copy//

¶39

P.A to Judge

Ebrahimkutty v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ebrahimkutty v. the Secretary

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

Sibitha Chandran Vs Kseb

Convenor, Jyothi Laboratories Thozhilali Vs Manager, Jyothi Laboratories Ltd.

Narayana Pillai S. Vs the Trivandrum Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited No. T 170

Varkey Dominic George Vs State of Kerala

R.Binukumar Vs the Board of Directors of the Anad Farmers Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Shayam Mohan Vs the Secretary