Disposed

Shajahan U, v. the Regional Transport Authority

Kerala HC17 Mar 2023WP(C)/5845/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking cancellation of a vehicle permit issued to the third respondent. The petitioner alleged violations via complaints. The High Court imposed a six-week deadline on the 1st respondent to consider these complaints and the 2nd respondent's report, ensuring a hearing to affected parties. The petition was disposed of with directions rather than a merits judgment.

What did the court decide?

The Regional Transport Authority is directed to consider the complaints in light of the 2nd respondent's report and take an appropriate decision within six weeks, after giving the petitioner and other

Shajahan U, Vs the Regional Transport Authority — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 5845 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

SHAJAHANU,
AGED44YEARS
S/OUMMER,UZHUNNAMHOUSE,MUTTUNGAL,
AREEKODE,MALAPPURAM,PIN–673639

¶7

BYADVSAJEEVKUMARK.GOPAL

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, MALAPARAMBA PO, KOZHIKODE - 673020, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶10

2 SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, CIVIL STATION, MALAPARAMBA PO, KOZHIKODE - 673020

¶11

3 ASSEB S/O KOYA, VAISYAMPURATH,KARASSERY P.O., KAKKAD,MUKKAM,KOZHIKODE – 673602

¶12

BYADVK.V.GOPINATHANNAIR

¶13

SMT.DEEPAV.,GP

¶14

THISWRITPETITION(CIVIL)HAVINGCOMEUPFOR
ADMISSIONON17.03.2023,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAY
DELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C) No.5845 of 2023

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner states that he has submitted Exts.P3 and P4 complaints before the 2nd respondent requesting that the regular permit issued in favour of the 3rd respondent on the route Areekode-Mavoor, Erinjamavu-Kozhikode be canceled. It is stated that the complaints were enquired by the 2nd respondent and Ext.P6 report has been submitted. The grievance of the petitioner is that no further action has been taken. It is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :

¶19

i. Issue a writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writs, orders or directions calling for the records leading to Exhibit P-7 and quash the same.

¶20

ii. Issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate writs, orders or directions directing the 1st respondent to consider the question regarding the cancellation of permit of the 3rd respondent for which the petitioner had given Exhibits P-3 and P-4 complaint and take a decision

¶21

W.P.(C) No.5845 of 2023

¶22

¶23

to cancel the permit in the light of Exhibit P-6 report of the 2nd respondent forthwith;

¶24

Heard Sri. Sajeev Kumar K. Gopal, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri. K.V. Gopinathan Nair, the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent, and Smt.Deepa V., the learned Government Pleader.

¶25

The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the next RTA meeting is scheduled to be held on 11.04.2023 and the objection raised by the petitioner will also be considered and appropriate decision can be taken as to whether the permit issued in favor of the 3rd respondent is required to be canceled in the light of Ext.P6.

¶26

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the submissions made across the bar, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Exts.P3 and P4 complaints in the light of Ext.P6 report of the 2nd respondent and take appropriate decision in accordance with law, expeditiously, in any event, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Before taking a decision

¶27

W.P.(C) No.5845 of 2023

¶28

¶29

an opportunity of being heard shall be afforded to the petitioner, the 3rd

¶30

respondent and other affected parties, if any.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

¶33

NS

¶34

W.P.(C) No.5845 of 2023

¶35

¶36

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5845/2023

¶37

PETITIONER(S)EXHIBITS:

¶38

`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT IN RESPECT OF VEHICLE` `BEARING REGISTRATION NO.KL-36-3230 DATED NIL`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE ENTERED` `INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD` `RESPONDENT DATED 10-11-2021`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE` `PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED` `25-07-2022`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE` `PETITIONER BEFORE THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT` `COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE DATED 25-07-2022`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE` `THE S.I.OF POLICE DATED 25-07-2022`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE SECRETARY RTA` `SUBMITTED BEFORE THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT` `AUTHORITY DATED 14-11-2022`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE 1ST` `RESPONDENT AT ITS MEETING HELD ON 22-11-2022` `IN ITEM NO.122`

¶39

RESPONDENT(S)EXHIBITS:NIL

Shajahan U, v. the Regional Transport Authority

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shajahan U, v. the 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

Trivandrum Club, Vs G. Chandrakumar

Trivandrum Club Vs T. Madhu

Trivandrum Club, Vazhuthacaud Vs Vishnu M

1. M.M. Antony Vs 1. Govt. of India

M/S.Umma Transport Vs the Regional Transport Officer

G & M Transporting Co. Vs *the Joint Regional Transport Officer