Disposed

Rasheed K. v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC1 Mar 2021WP(C)/3966/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a bus operator with a regular permit but unassigned timing due to pandemic, sought a direction from the Kerala High Court to grant him a provisional timing on an interim basis.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent to issue a provisional timing within four weeks based on AMVI report; this timing is not permanent until a conference fixes it.

Rasheed K. Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.3966 OF 2021(U)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

RASHEED K. AGED 44 YEARS S/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY, KUZHIKKANDATHIL HOUSE, MUNDUMUZHI P.O.,VAZHAKKAD, MALAPPURAM 673 640.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION ROAD, UPHILL, MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

¶11

SR.GP BIMAL K NATH

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C).No.3966 OF 2021(U) 2

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Dated this the 1st day of March 2021

¶16

The petitioner was granted regular permit by virtue of Ext.P1, subject to settlement of timings. The grievance of the petitioner is that, by virtue of Ext.P1 proceedings, it was issued. However, timing conference could not be convened due to the pandemic. The limited prayer sought by the petitioner is to grant him provisional timing, subject to the directions of this Court.

¶17

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader.

¶18

Having considered the limited prayer sought by the petitioner and in the light of the fact that, inspite of issuance of the regular permit, timing has not been fixed, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition with a direction. The respondent shall call for a report from the concerned AMVI and after ensuring that the timing proposed by the petitioner does not clash with the existing timing and if there is any clash, authorising the respondent to make

¶19

WP(C).No.3966 OF 2021(U) 3 appropriate modifications and to issue a provisional timing, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this will strictly be a provisional timing, which will continue till in a timing conference, a permanent timing is fixed. It is also made clear that, granting of provisional timing will not confer any right to insist that it should be adopted as the permanent timing

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

LEK

WP(C).No.3966 OF 2021(U) 4

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶27

EXHIBIT P1

¶28

TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS GRANTING REGULAR PERMIT TO THE PETITIONER NO.RTA1/214339/2017/M DATED 2/2/21.

Rasheed K. v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rasheed K. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mani. K.M., Vs the Circle Inspector of Excise

Pavithra P Venu Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

K.B.Ramachandran Vs the Primary Co-Operative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. NO.PT-234

Thomas George Vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Rama Padiyar Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Jiji Kurian Vs the Regional Transport Authority