Dismissed

Kunjimoythi, v. the Secretary

Kerala HC2 Aug 2023WP(C)/22525/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeking a direction to the Regional Transport Authority to consider the petitioner's request for revising stage carriage timings. The Court directed the Authority to consider the request expeditiously, within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's request for revised timings within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

Kunjimoythi, Vs the Secretary — 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

WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1945
WP(C) NO.22525 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

KUNJIMOYTHI, AGED 64 YEARS
S/O.AMMATH, EDAKKOT HOUSE, NECHAD,
NADUVANNOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673614

¶7

BY ADVS.
KURIAN T. VADAKKEL
M.JITHESH MENON
P.G.MAHESHKUMAR
R.BRIJESH

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
VADAKARA, MINI CIVIL STATION,
VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE, PIN – 673101

¶10

BY SMT.PARVATHY, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶12

W.P(C) No.22525 of 20232

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

This writ petition is filed seeking a direction
to the respondent to consider Ext.P3 request for
revision of timings of the petitioner's own service
operating on the route Koyilandy-Thamarassery via
Koyilandy Railway Station, Ulliyeri Balussery,
Perambra, in respect of stage carriage KL-56-M-8739
within a time frame.

¶15

2. The petitioner’s case is that even though he
had submitted Ext.P3 request on 12.06.2023, requesting
the respondent to revise the timings of the above
vehicle, the same has not been considered. Hence, this
writ petition.

¶16

3. Heard Sri.Kurian T.Vadakkel, learned counsel
for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent.

¶17

4. Having considered the pleadings and materials
and taking note of the submissions of the petitioner

¶18

W.P(C) No.22525 of 20233

¶19

that Ext.P3 is pending consideration before the
respondent, there will be a direction to the
respondent to consider Ext.P3 request in accordance
with law and as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, subject
to the priority of pending applications as directed to
be considered by this Court and after hearing the
petitioner and other affected parties, if any.

¶20

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶23

sp/02/08/2023

¶24

¶25

W.P(C) No.22525 of 2023

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:-

¶28

EXHIBIT 1COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT WITH WHICH THE
PETITIONER IS OPERATING ON THE ROUTE IN
QUESTION DATED 26-04-2022

¶29

EXHIBIT 2COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT DATED
13-05-2014 ISSUING A SET OF TIMINGS TO THE
PETITIONER'S SERVICE.

¶30

EXHIBIT 3COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE
PETITIONER WITH PROPOSED TIMINGS DATED
12-06-2023

Kunjimoythi, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunjimoythi, v. the Secretary

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

V.M.Bijaly, Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Shafi K., Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Sathyapalan Unnithan, Vs the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority

Rachel Mathews, Vs Union of India

Vijish K.V. Vs K.K. Sureshkumar

Sainaba, Vs the Secretary.