Jaimon Joseph vs Regional Transport Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 5384 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 26TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.2264 OF 2021(G)


PETITIONER:

               JAIMON JOSEPH
               AGED 51 YEARS
               S/O JOSEPH,
               KOOTTUMALAKUNNEL HOUSE,
               MANJOOR P.O.
               KOTTAYAM

               BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

RESPONDENTS:

      1        REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
               KOTTAYAM,
               COLLECTORATE P.O.
               KOTTAYAM-686 002.

      2        THE SECRETARY,
               REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
               KOTTAYAM,
               COLLECTORATE P.O.
               KOTTAYAM-686 002.


               SR.GP K.P HARISH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2264 OF 2021

                                              2




                                       JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15th day of February 2021

The petitioner herein is holding a regular

permit in respect of SC KL-05 G 5970, the petitioner

submits that, he has filed an application for

variation of conditions of permit, taking note of

the convenience of the public.

2. According to the petitioner, the limited

variation sought is for curtailment of a trip

operating on the route from Kottayam to

Pongamthanam, in the noon trip alone as there is no

time gap for staff for taking food and also due to

traffic in Kottayam town. The grievance of the

petitioner is that, the above application filed as

Ext.P3, has not been taken up and disposed of in

spite of considerable delay.

3. Opposing the application, the learned senior

Government Pleader submitted that, a report has been

received from the AMVI, who has reported that, the

cancellation of one timing/change of timing may WP(C).No.2264 OF 2021

adversely affect all other en-route operators timing

as well as it will affect the commuting public. It

was further submitted by the learned senior

Government Pleader that, the petitioner has sought

for a revision of timing, also by filing

W.P(C)No.2024/2021 which was disposed of by this

Court.

4. Essentially, I feel that, the Authority

shall dispose of Ext.P3 itself, after giving a

reasonable time to both sides and also the

petitioner to convince that, it will not affect the

public or the existing operators in any manner .

5. Having considered this, I am inclined to

dispose of the Writ Petition itself with a direction

to the second respondent to place before the first

respondent. The issue of variation as well as the

revision of timing, both are to be considered

together, so as to avoid the clash of orders.

Accordingly, there will be a direction

that, Ext.P3 shall be taken up along with the

revision of timing application mentioned in the Writ WP(C).No.2264 OF 2021

Petition No.2024/2021, on the same day and shall be

disposed of on merits, after giving a reasonable

opportunity to the affected parties of being heard.

Sd/-

                                    SUNIL THOMAS
                                           JUDGE
Jms                     //True Copy//   P.A to Judge
 WP(C).No.2264 OF 2021





                            APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1              TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 26.6.2019

EXHIBIT P2              TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
                        28.2.2014

EXHIBIT P3              TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR VARIATION
                        DATED 11.1.2021

EXHIBIT P4              TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED
                        11.1.2021

EXHIBIT P5              EXHIBIT P-8, TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN

WPC NO 8895/2020 DATED 20.3.2020

//True Copy// P.A to Judge