Disposed

Abdul Salam v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Cum Regional Transport Officer

Kerala HC1 Feb 2019WP(C)/2984/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition under Article 226 was filed by a stage carriage operator seeking a mandatory direction for the respondent to consider his pending request for revision of service timings via a timing conference within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the respondent to consider the revision request and pass appropriate orders by convening a timing conference within six weeks, with notice to the petitioner and other enroute operators.

Abdul Salam Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport… — 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 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 12TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 2984 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ABDUL SALAM, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.ANDRU HAJI, ERALICHALIL HOUSE, NARIPATTA, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY CUM REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, VATAKARA-673 101.

¶11

SMT C.S.SHEEJA, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No. 2984 of 2019

¶14

-2-

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The petitioner is an regular stage carriage operator on the route Kozhikode-Vilangad via. Atholi, Kalachi with stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-18/W-3251. The timing of the basic vehicle bearing registration No.KL-18/F-225 was settled on 13.07.2010, vide Exhibit-P1 proceedings. 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 Ext.P2 request for revision of timing in respect of his stage carriage, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶18

also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶19

Since Ext.P2 request made by the petitioner for revision of timings is pending consideration before the respondent, this writ 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,

¶20

WP(C).No. 2984 of 2019

¶21

-3-

¶22

strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and also 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

¶23

copy of this judgment.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

¶26

bpr

¶27

WP(C).No. 2984 of 2019

¶28

-4-

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶31

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RTA PROCEEDINGS SHOWING THE TIME SCHEDULE OF THE PETITIONER'S SERVICE 13/7/2010.

¶32

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 4.1.2019 ON THE ROUTE KOZHIKODEVILANGAD OPERATING WITH STATE CARRIAGE KL-18/W 3251.

¶33

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶34

//TRUE COPY//

¶35

P.A. TO JUDGE

Abdul Salam v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Cum Regional Transport Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Salam v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Cum Regional Transport Officer

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

M.P.Parameswaran Nair, Vs the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Abdul Assis M.I., Vs the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation

Sudha Lekshmi.M., Vs the Secretary

Abdul Khader T., Vs the Manager

Anitha Vs the Special Sales Officer No.Iv

Yatheendradas.P Vs the Kerala State Co-Operative Election Commission