Disposed

Sukumaran Nair v. the Transport Commissioner

Kerala HC22 Feb 2022WP(C)/4260/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition alleging unauthorized operation of stage carriage services by KSRRTC on a non-notified route without permits or time schedules, directing the District Collector to ensure compliance with equal opportunity principles.

What did the court decide?

Necessary steps to be taken by the District Collector to ensure no unauthorized operation of services by the second respondent on the non-notified/non-nationalised route.

Sukumaran Nair Vs the Transport Commissioner — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 3RD PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 4260 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUKUMARAN NAIR AGED 56 YEARS S/O MELOTH CHANDU NAIR, VANIYAM, VALAPPU, THANDAN THOTTI, CHEMNAD, KASARGOD-671 317

¶8

BY ADV P.DEEPAK

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER OFFICE OF THE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANNTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶11

2 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION , REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶12

3 THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023.

¶13

4 THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶14

5 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND CHAIRMAN, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARGOD, CIVIL STATION, KASARGOD-691 013.

¶15

6 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARGOD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KASARGOD-671 123.

¶16

WP(C) NO. 4260 OF 2022 -2-

¶17

7 THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARGOD, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, KASARGOD-671 123. 8 THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, K.S.R.T.C BUS STAND, KASARGOD-671 123. BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN G.P SRI SHAMEER P.M THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

SATHISH NINAN, J.

¶19

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No.4260 of 2022

¶20

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 22^nd day of February, 2022

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The petitioner is a stage carriage operator on the

¶23

route Balanthod-Kasargod. According to the petitioner, the route in question is a non-notified/non-nationalised route. The petitioner alleges that the second respondent Corporation is conducting operations on the route in question without obtaining permits from the Regional Transport Authority, Kasaragod and without an approved time schedule.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation and also the learned Government Pleader.

¶25

That the route in question is a nonnotified/non-nationalised route is not disputed. In P.V.George v. Regional Transport Authority, Wayanad and Ors [2020 SCC

¶26

online Ker 7005] , this Court held that on a non-notified route, the State Transport undertaking and the private

¶27

W.P.(C) No.4260 of 2022 -: 2 :-

¶28

operators operate on a level playing field and no special privileges are to be accorded to the state transport undertaking. Let necessary steps be taken by the 7^th respondent to ensure that there is no unauthorised operation of services by the second respondent on the non-notified/non-nationalised route stated as above. Writ Petition is disposed of with the said directions.

¶29

Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy//

P.S. to Judge

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4260/2022

¶34

PETITION	ER EXHIBITS
Exhibit	P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SEVENTH RESPONDENT DATED 11.9.2002
Exhibit	P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO KL-15- 9950 ON THE ROUTE KANHANGAD-MANGALAPURAM VALID TILL 4.7.2022
Exhibit	P3	TRUE COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT OF COUNTER SIGNATURE OF PERMIT DATED 14.7.2017 OF THE KARNATAKA STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
Exhibit	P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.12.2021 ADDRESSED TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT
Exhibit	P5	TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 2.2.2022 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE HONOURABLE MINISTER FOR TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
Exhibit	P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15.1.2020 REPORTED IN 2020 SCC ONLINE KER 7005

Sukumaran Nair v. the Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukumaran Nair v. the Transport Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Vs Sudha Mani

Ajeesh K.K., Vs Koodaranhi Ksheerolpadaka Sahakarana Sangam Ltd. NO.1887 (D) (Apcos)

Najeem Vs the Registrar of Co-Operative Societies

The Board of Directors of the Venkurinji Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. No. 3023 Vs the Unit Inspector

V.Babu, Vs Balaramapuram Panchayath Residence Welfare

Rugmani M. Vs the Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (G)