Disposed

Madhu.K v. the Secretary

Kerala HC20 Dec 2018WP(C)/41726/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Regional Transport Authority to consider the petitioner's application for a temporary stage carriage permit under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, ensuring an opportunity of being heard, within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the Ext.P3 application for a temporary permit within two weeks after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.

Madhu.K Vs the Secretary — 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

THURSDAY,THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 41726 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MADHU.K., AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, KUZHIPPATT HOUSE, SAMOOHAM ROAD, CHALAPPURAM P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA-673 101.

¶11

SMT. SHEEJA C.S., SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 41726 of 2018

¶14

-2-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner is a stage carriage operator on the route Palappally-Kannur as Limited Stop Fast Passenger in respect of stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-11/AX-1476, which was valid upto 30.11.2014. According to the petitioner, before the expiry of Ext.P1 regular permit, he has made an application for renewal, which is pending consideration. Now the petitioner has moved this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 application submitted by the petitioner for re-issue of 4 months temporary permit in respect of the aforesaid stage carriage to operate on the route Palappally-Kannur as Limited Stop Ordinary Service in continuation of Ext.P2 temporary permit, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶17

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

¶18

The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that the respondent shall consider and pass

¶19

WP(C).No. 41726 of 2018

¶20

-3-

¶21

appropriate orders on Ext.P3 application made by the petitioner for grant of temporary permit, by treating it as one filed under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act.

¶22

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 application made by the petitioner for temporary permit, strictly in accordance with law, treating it as one filed under Section 87(1)(d) of the Motor Vehicles Act, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard.

¶23

A decision in this regard shall be taken as expeditiously

¶24

as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶27

bpr

¶28

WP(C).No. 41726 of 2018

¶29

-4-

¶30

APPENDIX

¶31

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶32

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT VIDE NO.P.ST.18/6/1998 IN RESPECT OF STAGE CARRIAGE KL-11/AX-1476. EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT VIDE NO.P.TEM.18/376/2018 ISSUED IN RESPECT OF STAGE CARRIAGE KL-11/AX-1476. EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH CHALAN FOR RE-ISSUE OF 4 MONTHS TEMPORARY PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT ON 07.12.2018.

¶33

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶34

//TRUE COPY//

¶35

P.A. TO JUDGE

Madhu.K v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhu.K v. the Secretary

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

Kanjileri Thitheevi Vs Thirur Primary Co-Operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank

Saji Andrews Vs Joint Regional Transport Officer

Nandan.P. Vs the Secretary

Managing Committee of Nagaroor Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. Vs the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Biju v. Vs Kerala Public Service Commission

Preetha.E.D Vs the Kerala Public Service Commission