T.O.Thankachan vs The Regional Transport Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 24038 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
     TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 7TH POUSHA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 30804 OF 2021


PETITIONER:

          T.O.THANKACHAN
          AGED 58 YEARS
          S/O. AIPPUKUNJU, THEKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, S.KATHIPPARA
          P.O., VELLATHOOVAL, IDUKKI-685 571
          BY ADV I.DINESH MENON


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
          IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REGIONAL
          TRANSPORT OFFICE, IDUKKI, PAINAVU-685 603
    2     THE SECRETARY,
          REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY
          ITS SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, IDUKKI,
          PAINAVU-685 603
    3     SHAJI.A.R.,
          ATHIMATTATTIL HOUSE,PULINTHANAM P.O., IDUKKI-696 671



          SRI.PREMCHAND R.NAIR - GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 30804 OF 2021
                                2

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner and the 3rd respondent are existing

stage carriage operators. The 3rd respondent has applied

for variation of conditions of permit. The petitioner has

submitted Ext.P3 objection to the proposed timing

submitted by the 3rd respondent. The petitioner

apprehends that the 1st respondent will consider the

application submitted by the 3rd respondent for variation

without hearing the petitioner.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. In the nature of the direction which is proposed to

be passed, notice to 3rd respondent is dispensed with.

4. In the fact of circumstances of this case, there will

be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P3

objection submitted by the petitioner to the variation

application submitted by the 3rd respondent with due

notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, within a

period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of WP(C) NO. 30804 OF 2021

this judgment. I make it clear that I have not expressed

in any opinion as to the merits of the contentions of the

writ petition.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE AJM WP(C) NO. 30804 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30804/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 28.5.2020

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 11.2.2014 ISSUING TIMINGS TO THE PETITIONERS SERVICE

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 20.12.2021

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.

36299/2021 DATED 3.12.2021

//TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE