Ramakrishnan G vs The Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 4870 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

    WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942

                      WP(C).No.2518 OF 2021(L)


PETITIONER:

              RAMAKRISHNAN G.
              AGED 38 YEARS
              S/O.GOVINDAWAMY,
              GOKUL NAGAR,
              CHITTOOR P.O.,
              PALAKKAD-678101.

              BY ADV. SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN

RESPONDENT:

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


              SR.GP K.P HARISH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2518 OF 2021

                                        2




                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 10th day of February 2021

The petitioner herein is an existing stage

carriage operator of a stage carriage No.KL 8Z 3693 on the

route of Kuttipallam - Nemmara. The timing was last settled

on 25.03.2014.

2. According to the petitioner, thereafter several

new services were introduced in that route and there has

been a revision of timings of those vehicles. Hence,

petitioner was compelled to seek revision of timing of his

service. Ext.P3 is the application submitted by him. The

petitioner laments that, in spite of long delay, the

application has not been taken up and considered.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned senior Government Pleader, I am

inclined to dispose of the writ petition with a direction

that, the timing indicated in Ext.P2 may be considered as

the provisional timing and appropriate orders shall be

issued by the respondent, after getting a report from the

AMVI and after ensuring that, the timing so proposed does WP(C).No.2518 OF 2021

not tally with the timings of the existing en-route

operators. Such decision shall be taken within a period of

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

judgment. If there is a clash, necessary modifications can

be made.

Thereafter, this provisional timing will remain in

force, till the timing is fixed in accordance with law, in

a timing conference to be convened, wherein the timing

shall be finalised after giving a reasonable opportunity to

be heard to all parties concerned. This will not confer any

right on the petitioner to claim that the provisional

timings so fixed shall be considered as the final timing.

Sd/-

                                                  SUNIL THOMAS
                                                          JUDGE

Jms                     //True Copy//       P.A to Judge
 WP(C).No.2518 OF 2021





                            APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1              TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 30.10.2019.

EXHIBIT P2              TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
                        23.05.2014.

EXHIBIT P3              TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE
                        PETITIONER DATED 06.11.2020.


                           //True Copy//   P.A to Judge