Disposed

Sreekumar.v v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Kollam

Kerala HC16 Jun 2014WP(C)/8670/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a stage carriage operator, approached the High Court of Kerala via a writ petition seeking consideration of his temporary permit application by the Regional Transport Authority. The Court directed the Respondent to consider the application and pass orders within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to have his temporary permit application considered and orders passed within two weeks.

Sreekumar.v Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2014/26TH JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 8670 of 2014 (G)

¶6

PETITIONER :-

¶7

SREEKUMAR, THUNDIL VEEDU, MURUNTHAL, PERINAD P O, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS :-

¶10

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

¶11

2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM REP BY ITS SECRETARY – 691 001.

¶12

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-06-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

jvt

¶15

WP(C).No. 8670 of 2014 (G)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :-

¶18

EXHIBIT P1 :- TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION DTD 20/3/2014 ON THE ROUTE KOLLAM - VELLIMAN WITH STAGE CARRIAGE KL 02/AA 2210 IN PLACE OF KL 46/3009.

¶19

EXHIBIT P2 :- TRUE COPY OF THE CHELAN RECEIPT DTD 20/3/2014.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :- NIL

¶21

//TRUE COPY//

¶22

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶23

K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.

¶24

W.P.(C) No.8670 of 2014

¶25

Dated this the 16^th day of June 2014

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The complaint of the petitioner, a stage carriage operator is that, Ext.P1 application for temporary permit submitted by him has not been considered by the first respondent so far. A statement has been filed by the Government Pleader on behalf of the first respondent stating that, earlier an application filed by one Natarajan was dismissed by the Regional Transport Authority, Kollam finding that there was no temporary need. However, since no orders have been passed on Ext.P1 so far, it is only proper that the same is considered and orders are passed thereon expeditiously.

¶28

This Writ Petition is therefore, disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P1 application submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶29

Sd/K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.

¶30

Jvt

Sreekumar.v v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Kollam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreekumar.v v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Kollam

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

K.M Venkateswaran Vs T.M Sudha

Arun K Antony Vs Mahatma Gandhi Univeirsity

K.T. Rajashekhar Vs the Transport Commissioner

Jijo Thomas Vs Anoop Varghese

Raju Sebastian Vs State of Kerala

Ambika Vs State of Kerala