Disposed

Girish G Krishnan v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC2 Feb 2016WP(C)/1157/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of petition, directed petitioner to file fresh untrammelled motion for temporary transport permit, directing respondent to consider application within two weeks based on subsistence of vacancy and route availability.

What did the court decide?

Directed petitioner to make fresh motion for temporary permit; respondent to decide within two weeks.

Girish G Krishnan Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/13TH MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 1157 of 2016 (T)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

GIRISH G. KRISHNAN S/O. GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, RAMAKRISHNA VIHAR KALLUVATHUKKAL P.O., KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (RURAL), ATTINGAL-695101.

¶11

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SANJEETHA K.A.

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 1157 of 2016 (T)

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶16

EXHIBIT P1- COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 7-52015.

¶17

EXHIBIT P2- THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12-5-2015 IN WPC NO. 14208 OF 2015.

¶18

EXHIBIT P3- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 3-12-2015.

¶19

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE.

DCS

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 1157 OF 2016

¶25

Dated this the 02^nd day of February, 2016

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

As many as three reasons have been stated in Ext. P3 order to decline temporary permit to the petitioner. Whether those reasons are justifiable on facts is a matter that could be agitated in statutory appeal against Ext. P3 order.

¶28

I however direct the petitioner to make a fresh motion for temporary permit with the respondent which shall be considered untrammeled by Ext. P3 order. It is for the petitioner to establish that the defaulted vacancy still exists in order to enable him to operate service on the basis of a temporary permit. The permit earlier issued and that issued in succession shall be made available by the petitioner to enable the respondent to come to a just conclusion.

¶29

Such a temporary permit can be issued only if vacancy till subsists and if the timings have not hitherto

¶30

W.P.(C). No. 1157 OF 2016 2

¶31

been alloted to any other operators in the route. The application for temporary permit if any put in by the petitioner accordingly shall be dealt with by the respondent within a period of two weeks after its preferment.

¶32

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶33

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶34

DCS

Girish G Krishnan v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girish G Krishnan v. the Secretary, 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

Alex Itticheriya Vs M.G.Rajamanickam

Mohammedkutty Vs Thirunavaya Grama Panchayath

M.v.Aneesh Vs the Rta, Wayanad

Jolly P.Antony Vs Sivasankar IAS

Suneer Vs Ulliyeri Grama Panchayath

Sruthina N Vs M.G.University, Rep. by Vice Chancellor