Disposed

Safeer P.A v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC18 Dec 2018WP(C)/41072/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought revision of stage carriage timings. As the request was pending, the Court directed the Respondent to convene a timing conference within six weeks, notify operators, and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent to convene a timing conference within six weeks, notify the petitioner and other enroute operators, and pass appropriate orders on the revision of timings.

Safeer P.A Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY,THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.41072 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SAFEER P.A, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.KUNHIMUHAMMED, PANDARA ARAKKAL HOUSE, WEST KODUR, KODUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MALAPPURAM, PIN - 676 505.

¶11

SMT. SHEEJA C.S., SENIORGOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No.41072 of 2018

¶14

-2-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner is conducting a regular stage

¶17

carriage service on the route KottakkalPerinthalmanna in respect of stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-53/4676. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the timings was last settled on 15.05.2001. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to consider the request made in Ext.P1 for revision of timings in respect of the said stage carriage, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and other affected operators.

¶18

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

¶19

petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶20

3. Since Ext.P1 request made by the

¶21

petitioner for revision of timings is pending consideration before the respondent, this writ

¶22

WP(C).No.41072 of 2018

¶23

-3-

¶24

petition is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, by directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the said request, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and other enroute operators, after convening a timing conference, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶25

It is made clear that, this Court has not expressed anything as to the maintainability of the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P1 and it is for the respondent to consider the same, strictly in accordance with law.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶28

bpr

¶29

WP(C).No.41072 of 2018

¶30

-4-

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 07/12/2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

¶34

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.A. TO JUDGE

Safeer P.A v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safeer P.A 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulthan Bathery Co-Operative Urban Bank Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Perumbavoor Hotels and Resorts Pvt.Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Hafiz Mohammed Shuhaib Vs the Special Sale Officer/Arbitrator

Shihabudeen P.K. Vs the Secretary

K.S. Nazar Vs the Muvattupuzha Primary Co-Operative Agricultural & Rural

The Calicut City Service Co-Op Bank Ltd. Vs State of Kerala