Dismissed

V.C. Joseph Vettikkat, v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Aug 2023WP(C)/19305/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a permit and seeking restoration of service. The Court deemed the undertaking in the counter affidavit regarding a trial run as sufficient grounds to settle the matter without hearing the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed by recording parity of respondent's undertaking regarding trial operation.

V.C. Joseph Vettikkat, Vs State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 12TH SRAVANA, 1945
WP(C) NO.19305 OF 2023

¶4

PETITIONER:

¶5

V.C. JOSEPH VETTIKKAT, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O. CHACKO
VETTIKKATT HOUSE, KANAYANKAYAL, PERUVANTHANAMA
VIA IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN – 685532

¶6

BY ADVS.

¶7

BIJU C. ABRAHAM
THOMAS C.ABRAHAM

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001

¶10

2 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT COMPANY, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, EAST FORT, PAZHAVANGADI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695023 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶11

3 THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSTRC BHAVAN, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686002

¶12

4 THE KSRTC REGIONAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE KSRTC REGIONAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682011

¶13

BY ADVS.

¶14

SRI.V.S.SREEJITH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SRI.P.C.CHACKO

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) No.19305 of 2023

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The writ petition is filed against
cancellation of permit and for direction to
restore service in the route as allotted as per
Ext.P3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the
3rd respondent and paragraph 4 thereof reads as
follows:

¶20

“4. I respectfully submit that the
second respondent, Kerala Road Transport
Corporation started operation of service
on route Ponkunnam-Valliyakavu from
27.06.2023 onwards and it is started as a
trial run and it will be continued if it
is feasible according to present norms of
KSRTC. Therefore, there is no merit in
the writ petition and the same is liable
to be dismissed. It is prayed
accordingly.”

¶21

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that paragraph 4 of the counter affidavit

¶22

WP(C) No.19305 of 2023

¶23

¶24

can be recorded and the writ petition can be
closed.

¶25

Accordingly, recording paragraph 4 of the
counter affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, the
writ petition is disposed of.

¶26

 Sd/-

¶27

 MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
 JUDGE

¶28

sp/03/08/2023

¶29

WP(C) No.19305 of 2023

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :-

¶33

EXHIBIT P1COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 4/4/2023 THUS
SUBMITTEDBYTHEADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER, VALLIYANKAVU DEVASWOM BOARD

¶34

EXHIBIT P2

¶35

COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 19/4/2023 THUS
SUBMITTED BY DEAN KURIAKOSE BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT

¶36

EXHIBIT P3COPY OF THE TRIP SHEET ISSUED BY THE
RESPONDENTS

V.C. Joseph Vettikkat, v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.C. Joseph Vettikkat, v. State of Kerala

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

Rachel Mathews, Vs Union of India

Vijish K.V. Vs K.K. Sureshkumar

Kunjimoythi, Vs the Secretary

Subin Jose T., Vs the Secretary

Hariz, Vs the Secretary

M/S. Kerala Rare Earths & Minerals Ltd. Vs State of Kerala