Dismissed

Sathyapalan Unnithan, v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC1 Aug 2023WP(C)/19513/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was filed by a stage carriage owner seeking consideration of his application for a temporary permit by the Regional Transport Authority. The court directed the respondent to consider the application and pass appropriate orders within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the application for temporary permit within two weeks.

Sathyapalan Unnithan, Vs the Secretary, Regional… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1^ST DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 10TH SRAVANA, 1945

¶5

WP(C) NO. 19513 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SATHYAPALAN UNNITHAN, S/O. BHARGHAVAN PILLAI, ARAPURA PUTHEN VEEDU, PALAMEL, NOORANADU, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT - 690504

¶8

BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, ALAPUZHA., PIN – 688001 R BY GP ADV. PARVATHY K.

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C) NO. 19513 OF 2023 : 2 :

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

The petitioner is the owner of a stage carriage bearing Registration No. KL 04/P 4281 operating on the route Keerickadu Jetty – Adoor. He had submitted Exts.P2, P3 and P4 applications for renewal, replacement and temporary permit respectively before the respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application for temporary permit is not so far considered by the respondent.

¶15

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

¶16

In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be a direction to the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P4 application for temporary permit, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶17

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶18

Sd/-

¶19

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶20

¶21

WP(C) NO. 19513 OF 2023 : 3 :

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶24

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE	LETTER DATED 17.05.2023 PETITIONE
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT SUBMITTED 17.05.2023.	APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF BY THE PETITIONER DATED
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE OF VEHICLE SUBMI 17.05.2023.	APPLICATION FOR REPLACEMENT TTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT SUBMITTED	APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY BY THE PETITIONER

Sathyapalan Unnithan, v. the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sathyapalan Unnithan, 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

Travancore-Cochin Chemicals Co-Operative Society Limited No. R-23IV/680, 681, Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation

The Dakshina Bharatha Hindi Prachara Sabha (Kerala), Vs the State of Kerala

The Dakshina Bharatha Hindi Prachara Sabha (Kerala), Vs the State of Kerala

V.M.Bijaly, Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shafi K., Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Suvarna N.T., Vs the Regional Transport Authority