This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/5TH MAGHA, 1937
WP(C).No. 1459 of 2016 (F)
PETITIONER(S):
KABEER, AGED 41 YEARS S/O MOHAMMED, MANNIL THODI HOUSE, KUNIYIL KEEZHUPARAMBA PO, MALAPPURAM
BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SMT.N.C.SALINI SMT.K.S.SMITHA SRI.C.RADHAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 020
R BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SANJEETHA.K.A.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 1459 of 2016 (F)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT MADE IN WPC 36643/15 DT. 15/12/15
EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DT. 13/4/15 FILED BY THE AUTHRIZED OFFICER ALONG WITH A SKETCH OF THE VARIED ROUTE IN QUESTION
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE.
V. CHITAMBARESH, J
W.P.(C). No. 1459 OF 2016
Dated this the 25th day of January, 2016
JUDGMENT
The parties are at variance as regards the actual route to be covered under the variation of the regular permit granted. The ambiguity can be clarified at the time of issuance of granted permit. The above need not deter the second respondent from conducting a timing conference. The same shall be done and the timings finalised within a
period of one month.
The writ petition is disposed of.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE
DCS
KABEER
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE
THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE
V. CHITAMBARESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
