Remanded

Pramodhkumar v. Secretary

Kerala HC22 Apr 2016WP(C)/14709/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioners sought renewal of transport permits after their previous permit was quashed. The court directed the respondent to consider an application for a temporary permit on a specific route after hearing the parties and related litigant within two weeks, before disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to consider the temporary permit application after hearing the petitioner and the related litigant within two weeks.

Pramodhkumar Vs Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2016/2ND VAISAKHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 14709 of 2016 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. PRAMODHKUMAR, PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, THOLAMPRA P.O., THALASSERY.

¶8

2. AFSAL P., PALATHINKAL HOUSE, MATTANNUR, THALASSERY.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KANNUR 670 001.

¶12

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-04-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

msv/

¶15

WP(C).No. 14709 of 2016 (K)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

P1. COPY OF THE RENEWED PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

¶19

P2. COPY OF THE WRIT PETITION IN WPC 13683/2016.

¶20

P3. COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT APPLICATION WITH PROPOSED VACANT TIMINGS.

¶21

P4. COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶23

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

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

Msv/

P.V.ASHA, J.

================

W.P.(C)No.14709 of 2016

¶31

=================

¶32

Dated this the 22^nd day of April, 2016

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

First Petitioner was operating with stage carriage KL-58 C 9979, which was replaced by KL-58 K 6100. A renewal of permit was granted to him which was valid till 07.08.2017, which was quashed by this Court in W.P.(C)No.13863/2016. Petitioner submits that, he later submitted Exts.P3 and P4 applications for regular permit as well as for temporary permit, subsequent to Ext.P2 judgment in W.P.(C) No.13863/2016.

¶35

I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and Sri.O.D.Sivadas, who submitted that a petition for impleading Sri.Satheesan, the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.13863/2016 is filed.

¶36

In view of the fact that the earlier permit was cancelled at the instance of Sri.Satheesan, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.13863/2016, and since the petitioner has submitted application for temporary permit on the route KanhirakollyIritty-Thalassery in the vacancy of KL-58 C 9979, there shall be a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P4 application of the

¶37

W.P.(C)No.14709 of 2016 2

¶38

1^st petitioner for temporary permit, and pass orders in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner as well as Sri.Satheesan(aforesaid) within a period of two weeks from the

¶39

date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶40

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶41

Sd/- P.V.ASHA, JUDGE

¶42

MJL

Pramodhkumar v. Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramodhkumar v. Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Prasad Vs Airport Authority of India & Another

M/S.Merrell Pharmaceuticals Co. Vs State of Kerala

K.M.George Vs Hindustan Steelwork Constn. Ltd.

Boban Antony Vs Authorised Officer, Uco Bank

Sudheesh Mohanan Vs Authorised Officer

Dr.Sapna C.S Vs State of Kerala