Kerala High Court
T.C.Thomas vs The Regional Transport Authority on 12 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS
TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 22TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.28325 OF 2020(M)
PETITIONER:
T.C.THOMAS
AGED 52 YEARS
THAKIDIYEL PARAMBIL,
CHANNANIKKAD,
KOTTAYAM.
BY ADV. SMT.P.ASHA
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 002.
2 THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
COLLECTORATE P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 002.
3 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
ALAPPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
4 THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA-688 001.
5 KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 034.
R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM)
SR.GP SRI.K.P HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.28325 OF 2020
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 12th day of January 2021
By virtue of Ext.P3 judgment in M.V.A.A No.79/2020
by which the first respondent the Regional Transport
Authority (R.T.A) was directed to consider the modified
application produced before the State Transport
Appellate Tribunal (S.T.A.T) as Ext.P1 in accordance
with law, within three months from the date of receipt
of a copy of that judgment, after hearing both sides
including K.S.R.T.C.
2. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that,
the meetings are not being convened and hence, there is
an inordinate delay in complying with the direction of
the appellate authority. It seems that, in the present
pandemic situation practically RTA meetings are not
being convened.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner prayed
that a direction may be given that the matter may be
taken up by circulation. This request was opposed by
WP(C).No.28325 OF 2020
the learned senior Government Pleader condending that
the instruction is that, the route in question is a
highly saturated one and necessarily all those issues
will have to be considered and objections if any
considered. I feel that the learned senior Government
Pleader is justified in the submission. Having
considered this, after hearing the learned counsel for
the petitioner, the learned senior Government Pleader
as well as the learned standing counsel for the
K.S.R.T.C, I am inclined to dispose of the writ
petition itself, with a direction to the RTA to convene
the RTA meeting as expeditiously as possible and to
pass appropriate orders within one month from the date
of production of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS
JUDGE
Jms //True Copy// P.A to Judge.
WP(C).No.28325 OF 2020
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA
DATED 19.2.2020 IN ITEM NO.17.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MODIFIED REGULAR PERMIT
APPLICATION DATED 11.7.2020.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3.7.2020 IN
MVAA NO.79/2020.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
25.9.2020.
