Haneefa T.K. vs The Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 12025 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

     FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 26TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                         WP(C).No.8353 OF 2021(T)


PETITIONER/S:

                HANEEFA T.K., AGED 49 YEARS
                S/O. ISMAIL, THOTTIYIL KOLLANCHERI HOUSE,
                OMACHAPPUZHA P.O, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

                BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA

RESPONDENT/S:

                THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
                MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM P.O,
                PIN - 676505, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

                R1 BY GP SRI. C.K.PRASAD
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.8353 OF 2021(T)        ..2..




                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner applied for a regular permit on the route

of Theyyala - Vylathur - Pookkiparambu. By Ext.P1, it was

allowed, subject to settlement of timings. The petitioner has

produced the vehicle and the timing conference was

scheduled to be held on 07.01.2020. Meeting could not be

held on that day due to Covid-19 pandemic and thereafter, it

has not been taken up for consideration.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, due to non-

settlement of timings, he is not able to run the vehicle which

causes extreme hardship to him. He requested that, the

timing proposed by him may be accepted.

3. Having considered the submission of the learned

counsel for the petitioner and after hearing the learned

senior Government Pleader for the respondents, I am

inclined to dispose of the writ petition, directing the first

respondent to call for a report from the concerned Motor

Vehicles Inspector and after satisfying himself that, the WP(C).No.8353 OF 2021(T) ..3..

timing proposed by the petitioner as evident from Ext.P1

does not clash with the timings of the existing operators, he

shall issue permit subject to the timings provisionally. In case

of any clash, the timing can be appropriately altered. The

above process shall be completed by the respondent within a

period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. This timing will continue till the timing is finally

settled in a timing conference to be convened later. It is

made clear that, this timing will be purely provisional and

will not confer any right to the petitioner, to claim that it

should be considered as the final timings.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

                                  MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN,
                                            JUDGE
     SB
 WP(C).No.8353 OF 2021(T)     ..4..


                           APPENDIX
     PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

     EXHIBIT P1        PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE
                       REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,

MALAPPURAM DATED 10.07.2019 VIDE ITEM NO.2.

EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM DATED 07.01.2020 VIDE ITEM NO.38.

EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 15.02.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 2281/2021 DATED 09.02.2021.

//TRUE COPY //

P.A to Judge