Kappurath Sadasivan vs The Regional Transport Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 11332 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

  THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA,
                           1943

                   WP(C).No.6056 OF 2021(F)


PETITIONER:

              KAPPURATH SADASIVAN
              AGED 54 YEARS
              S/O. LAKSHMI, DEVAHITHA, ATTUR MANAPPADI,
              THRISSUR - 680 583.

              BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
              CIVIL STATION P. O., PALAKKAD - 678001.

     2        THE SECRETARY
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD,
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
              CIVIL STATION P. O., PALAKKAD - 678001.


              SRI.BIMAL K NATH, SR.GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP             FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME             DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.6056 OF 2021(F)        2




                         JUDGMENT

Dated this the 8th day of April 2021

The petitioner, who is an existing stage carriage operator.

His permit expires on 31.12.2022. He submitted an application

for variation of condition of permit. Three specific variations

regarding in relation to the route were sought. According to

the petitioner, the above application was forwarded for enquiry

and reported to Joint RTO, Pattambi who has conducted an

enquiry and reported that the extended portion is ill served

area and variation applied is beneficial to the public. He also

reported that variation was not contrary to Sub-section (3) of

Section 80 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The grievance of the

petitioner is that, inspite of these facts, the application for

variation was not included in the subsequent RTA meetings.

The learned Senior Government Pleader, on instructions,

submitted that the application can be considered in the next

RTA meeting. Having considered this, I am inclined to dispose

of the writ petition itself by directing the respondents to take

up and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 application, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of six

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. If

the RTA meeting cannot be carried during the above period

due to reasons beyond the control of the RTA, it shall be taken

up and considered in accordance with law, by adopting

procedure under Rule 130 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act,

after considering the objections, if any, filed by the objectors

concerned.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE LEK

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 3.1.2020.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 14.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE ROUTE.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 14.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 11.2020.