Disposed

Riyanath.P v. Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC11 Jan 2019WP(C)/170/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by autorickshaw permit holders in Kannur District seeking mandamus to command the Regional Transport Authority to entertain their applications for varying permit conditions. Court directed re-submission of applications and consideration within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to re-submit applications for variation of permit conditions; RTO to place them before the RTO Authority for consideration and pass appropriate orders within six weeks.

Riyanath.P Vs Regional Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 21ST POUSHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 170 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 RIYANATH.P AGED 42 YEARS S/O.SAJID M, FIDHA VILLA, ATHAZHAKUNNU, KOTTALI POST, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670001.

¶8

2 KHALEEL VATTAKUNNUMMEL, S/O.HAMEED, V.K.HOUSE, C P WARD, KANNUR CITY POST, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001.

¶9

3 SIDEEK M.T. S/O.KUNHAMMED, MULLAPPALLY THAYYIL HOUSE, NIDUVAT, NARATH POST, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 601.

¶10

4 PRIJIL POOCHERI, S/O.PREMAN POOCHERI, PREMGEETH, EACHUR POST, KANNUR DISTRICT-670591.

¶11

5 RIMISHA C.K., W/O.RENJITH C.K., KODIYIL HOUSE, CHOVVA POST, KANNUR-670006.

¶12

6 ASHRAF C., S/O.ALI, FAMSHEENAS, THAZHE CHOVVA, KANNUR-670 018.

¶13

7 SREENIVASAN K., AGED 49 YEARS S/O.NARAYANAN, 694/6,KOYYOTT HOUSE, KAKKADU ROAD, THANA POST KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 012.

¶14

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

¶15

-2-

¶16

8 SREEJITH T., S/O.M UTHAMAN, PULLANGYOD HOUSE, ELAYAVOOR, SOUTH MUNDAYAD POST, VARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT PIN-670594.

¶17

BY ADV.

¶18

SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR

¶19

RESPONDENT/S:

¶20

1 REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

¶21

KANNUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNUR-670002.

¶22

2 REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, KANNUR-670002.

¶23

3 KANNUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY IT SECRETARY, KANNUR-670 001.

¶24

BY ADVS. SMT.C.S.SHEEJA, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.K.CHANDRAN PILLAI (SR.) SMT.NAMITHA NAMBIAR SMT.S.AMBILY SMT.VANIAH MARIA DOMINIC SRI.K.K.DINESH KUMAR SRI.SAJI THOMAS

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

-3-

JUDGMENT

The petitioners, who are the registered owners of autorickshaws

¶30

covered by Exts.P1, P4, P7, P10, P13, P16, P19 and P22 certificate of registration and Exts.P2, P5, P8, P11, P14, P17, P20 and P23 contract carriage permits, whereby they are permitted to ply their autorickshaws in all fit roads in Kannur District, subject to the condition that the vehicles shall not park or pick up passengers from within the city, with the respective parking places mentioned in the contract carriage permits, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to receive and allow Exts.P3, P6, P9, P15, P18, P21 and P24 applications made for variation of the conditions of Exts.P2, P5, P8, P11, P14, P17, P20 and P23 contract carriage permits.

¶31

On 04.01.2019 when this writ petition came for admission, learned Senior Government Pleader sought time to get instructions.

¶32

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned Standing Counsel for the Kannur Municipality.

¶33

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

¶34

-4-

¶35

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, though the petitioner approached the 1^st respondent with Exts.P3, P6, P9, P15, P18, P21 and P24 applications, the same were not entertained. In such circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking appropriate reliefs.

¶36

The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that if

¶37

the petitioners are re-submitting Exts.P3, P6, P9, P15, P18, P21 and P24 applications along with a certified copy of this judgment, the 2^nd respondent shall place it before the 1^st respondent and thereafter the 1^st respondent shall take an appropriate decision thereon, with notice to the petitioners and also to the 3^rd respondent Municipal Corporation and after affording them an opportunity of being heard.

¶38

In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶39

(1) Within one week form the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the petitioner shall re-submit Exts.P3, P6, P9, P15, P18, P21 and P24 applications before the 2^nd respondent and remit the requisite fee.

¶40

(ii) If the applications submitted by the petitioners are in

¶41

order, the 2^nd respondent shall place it before the 1^st

¶42

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

¶43

-5-

¶44

respondent, and thereafter, the 1^st respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioners and also to the Secretary of the 3^rd respondent Municipality.

¶45

(iii) A decision in this regard shall be taken, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks thereafter.

¶46

Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

-6-

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶52

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY REGISTRATI	OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ON WITH RESPECT TO KL-59-A-8005.
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY PETITIONER	OF THE PERMIT DATED 9.4.2018 THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST .
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY 24.12.2018 BEFORE THE	OF THE APPLICATION DATED TENDERED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY REGISTRATI	OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ON WITH RESPECT TO KL-13-AM-6689.
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY PETITIONER	OF THE PERMIT DATED 28.7.2018 THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND .
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY 26.12.2018 BEFORE THE	OF THE APPLICATION DATED TENDERED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY REGISTRATI	OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ON WITH RESPECT TO KL-59-F-7733.
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY ISSUED BY PETITIONER	OF THE PERMIT DATED 28.8.2016 THE RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD .
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY 24.12.2018 BEFORE THE	OF THE APPLICATION DATED TENDERED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10	TRUE COPY REGISTRATI	OF THE CERTIFICATE OF ON WITH RESPECT TO KL-13-AM-9972.

¶53

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

¶54

-7-

¶55

EXHIBIT P11	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 18.9.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P12	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27.12.2018 TENDERED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION WITH RESPECT TO KL-13-AM-9712.
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 18.9.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P15	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.12.2018 TENDERED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P16	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION WITH RESPECT TO KL-58-L-3266.
EXHIBIT P17	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 5.10.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P18	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.12.2018 TENDERED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P19	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION WITH RESPECT TO KL-58-L-9326.
EXHIBIT P20	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 8.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 7TH PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P21	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.12.2018 TENDERED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P22	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION WITH RESPECT TO KL-13-AN-3412.

¶56

W.P.(C)No.170/2019

¶57

-8-

¶58

EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 9.11.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 8TH PETITIONER.

¶59

EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 24.12.2018 TENDERED BY THE 8TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P25 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 4.7.2018 IN WP(C) NO.21771 OF 2018 ON THE FILES OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.

¶60

//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Riyanath.P v. Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Riyanath.P v. 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

V.Balaram Vs the Co-Operative Arbitration Court (Northern)

The Guruvayoor Co-Operative Urban Ltd. NO.F1652 Vs the Co-Operative Arbitration Court (Northern)

Sunilkumar.M Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Election Commission

V. Subramannian Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Mallika Vs the Poomangalam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

Alikutty, Vs the Secretary