Disposed

Ruban Antony v. Regional Transport Authority, Kannur

Kerala HC1 Mar 2019WP(C)/5233/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an autorickshaw owner, filed this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Regional Transport Authority to accept and decide his application for variation of permit conditions within a fixed time frame.

What did the court decide?

Direction to resubmit application and remit fee within one week; direction to RTA to consider application within six weeks.

Ruban Antony Vs Regional Transport Authority, Kannur — 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 MARCH 2019 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 5233 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RUBAN ANTONY, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. ANTONY DAS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.62A, KANNUR CONTONMENT, NEAR THERESA'S HIGH SCHOOL, BURNASSERY POST, KANNUR - 670 013.

¶8

BY ADVS. SMT.O.M.SHALINA SRI.T.V.VINU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KANNUR CIVIL STATION, EDAPPALLY - PANVEL HIGHWAY, KANNUR - 670 002.

¶11

2 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MOTOR VEHICLES DEPARTMENT, TRANSPORT COMMISSIONERATE, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THYCAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.

¶12

3 ADDL.R3.KANNUR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KANNUR DISTRICT, KERALA - 670 001, R3 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DTD.01/03/2019 IN I.A.1/2019.

¶13

SRI K.P.HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)5233 OF 2019

JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is the registered owner of an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-13/AM-8751, covered

¶19

by Exhibit P1 certificate of registration and Ext.P2 contract carriage permit, whereby the petitioner is permitted to ply his autorickshaw in all fit roads in Kannur district, subject to the condition that the vehicle shall not park or pick up passengers from within the city, with parking place at Chalad, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent Regional Transport Authority to accept Ext.P3 application dated 03.01.2019 for variation of permit conditions along with the requisite fee; and consider and dispose the same in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned Standing Counsel for the additional 3^rd respondent Municipality.

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, though the petitioner approached the Secretary of the 1^st respondent with Exts.P3 application, the same was not

¶22

¶23

WP(C)5233 OF 2019

¶24

entertained. It was in such circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking appropriate reliefs.

¶25

The learned Senior Government Pleader on

¶26

instructions would submit that the Secretary of the 1^st respondent is yet to receive Exts.P3 application and that, the Secretary shall accept such application, if it is in order and place it before the 1 st respondent Regional Transport Authority.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner shall re-submit Exts.P3 application before the Secretary of the 1^st respondent and he shall also remit the requisite fee, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶28

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

¶29

(i) Within one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, the petitioner shall resubmit Exts.P3 application before the Secretary of the 1^st respondent and remit the requisite fee.

¶30

(ii) If the application submitted by the petitioner is in

¶31

order, the Secretary of the 1^st respondent Regional Transport Authority shall place it before the 1 st respondent and thereafter, the said respondent s hall

¶32

¶33

consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner and also to the Secretary of the additional 3^rd respondent respondent Municipality.

¶34

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

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶42

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONER'S VEHICLE WITH REGISTRATION NO.KL-13-AM-8751.

¶43

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT NO. P.CO. 13/2578/2018 DATED 06.09.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶44

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN "FORM P.V.A." DATED 03.01.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶45

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL

¶46

TRUE COPY

¶47

P.A. TO JUDGE

Ruban Antony v. Regional Transport Authority, Kannur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruban Antony v. Regional Transport Authority, Kannur

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

K.J.Shaju Vs State of Kerala

Sumitha.T Vs Calicut City Service Co-Operative Bank LTD.D.2777

K.S.Mohammed Nasser, Vs the Secretary

Bindhu.K Vs State of Kerala

Anithkumar K. Vs the Secretary Regional Transport

Prakashan Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Cum Regional Transport Officer