Joseph T.D., Vs Secretary — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Joseph T.D., Vs Secretary — Kerala HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's Ext.P4 objections to the timings of the 2nd respondent while finalizing the timings for the temporary permit to be issued to the 2nd respondent in terms of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal's directions in MVAA No.73/2025; the writ petition stands disposed of accordingly, without notice to the 2nd respondent.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's Ext.P4 objections, confined to the timings of the temporary permit issued to the 2nd respondent, must be considered by the 1st respondent while finalizing the timings for the temporary permit issued pursuant to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal's directions in MVAA No.73/2025.

Court's answer

While finalizing the timings in respect of the temporary permit to be issued to the 2nd respondent in terms of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal's directions in MVAA No.73/2025, the objections raised by the petitioner to the 2nd respondent's timings shall also be considered by the 1st respondent.

Ratio / Principle

Since no order to the prejudice of the 2nd respondent is being issued, the writ petition can be disposed of without notice to the 2nd respondent.

Key takeaways

The petitioner's objections are restricted to the timings and do not extend to the grant of the temporary permit to the 2nd respondent.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Kerala High Court (Gopinath P., J.), by neutral citation 2025:KER:30162, disposed of WP(C) No. 10847 of 2025 (Joseph T.D. v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam & Anr.). The petitioner had sought expeditious consideration of his Ext.P4 objections dated 20.02.2025 against the temporary permit issued to the 2nd respondent (issued on the basis of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal's directions in MVAA No.73/2025, the Tribunal having extended its interim order on 25.03.2025 subject to settlement of timings). HELD: (i) as no order to the prejudice of the 2nd respondent was being issued, the writ petition could be disposed of without notice to her; (ii) while finalizing the timings for the temporary permit to be issued to the 2nd respondent in terms of the Tribunal's directions, the 1st respondent shall also consider the petitioner's objections to the timings; and (iii) the petitioner's objections are restricted to the timings and do not question the grant of the temporary permit itself.

2025:KER:30162

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1947

WP(C) NO. 10847 OF 2025

PETITIONER:

JOSEPH T.D.,
AGED 48 YEARS,
S/O. JOEPH SEBASTIAN, THOTTUMKAL HOUSE, PALA P.O.,
KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686575.

BY ADV LAVARAJ M.G.

RESPONDENTS:

1 SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O., KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686002.

2MOLY MANUEL,
MUNDACKAL HOUSE, CHETHIMATTAM, PALA, KOTTAYAM,
PIN – 686575.

SRI. SREEJITH V.S., GP

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
04.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 10847 OF 2025

2

2025:KER:30162

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking

expeditious consideration of Ext.P4 objections submitted by the petitioner regarding the temporary permit issued to the 2^nd respondent.

The learned Government Pleader submits that the temporary permit issued to the 2^nd respondent was on the basis of the directions issued by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in MVAA No.73/2025. It is submitted that by order dated 25.03.2025, the Tribunal has extended the interim order regarding issuance of temporary permit to the 2^nd respondent subject to settlement of timings. It is submitted that if Ext.P4 objection is restricted to the timings, the same can be considered by the 1^st respondent.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that Ext.P4 may be treated as an objection to the timings and the same may also be considered before issuing fresh temporary permit to the 2^nd respondent.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, I am of the view that since no order to the prejudice of the 2^nd respondent is being issued, this writ petition can be disposed of without notice to the 2^nd respondent. The Tribunal has directed the issuance of a temporary

WP(C) NO. 10847 OF 2025

3

2025:KER:30162

permit to the 2^nd respondent by extending the interim order in MVAA No.73/2025 by order dated 25.03.2025. However that order indicates that the issuance of temporary permit is subject to finalization of timings.

Therefore, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing that while finalizing the timings in respect of the temporary permit to be issued to the 2^nd respondent in terms of the directions issued by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in MVAA No.73/2025, the objections raised by the petitioner to the timings of the 2^nd respondent shall also be considered by the 1^st respondent. I make it clear that the objections raised by the petitioner is restricted to the timing and not to the grant of temporary permit to the 2^nd respondent.

Sd/GOPINATH P. JUDGE

DK

WP(C) NO. 10847 OF 2025

4

2025:KER:30162

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10847/2025

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER DATED 03.04.2024

Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE TIMINGS ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER’S SERVICE DATED 09.5.2022

Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUING
TEMPORARY PERMIT DATED 23.01.2025

Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION PREFERRED BY
THE PETITIONER DATED 20.02.2025

Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP[C]
NO.7715/2025 DATED 28.2.2025

Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED
ON 23.01.2025 FOR THE PERIOD FROM
24.04.2025 TO 12.2.2025

Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT ISSUED
ON 11.3.2025 FOR THE PERIOD FROM
05.03.2025 TO 24.03.2025