Sabir.M.A vs The District Collector And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1669 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                  PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 25TH POUSHA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.471 OF 2021(H)


PETITIONER:

               SABIR.M.A
               AGED 30 YEARS
               SANOOB MANZIL, NIJ ROAD, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM,
               REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SANOOP M A,
               356, NIJ ROAD, KUMBALAM, ERNAKULAM-682506.

               BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND CHAIRMAN
               REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM,
               CIVIL STATION P O,
               KAKKANAD-682030.

      2        THE DEPUTY TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER
               CENTRAL ZONE II,
               ERNAKULAM, KUNNUMPURAM P O,
               ERNAKULAM-682021.

      3        THE SECRETARY
               REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM,
               CIVIL STATION P O, KAKKANAD-682030.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SR.GP K.P HARISH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
15.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P(C).471/2021
                                      2




                               JUDGMENT

Petitioner is an operator of an existing stage carriage operating on

the route Panangad-South Chittoor in respect of a stage carriage. The

above is classified as a city service. Contending that a new entrant was

granted a regular permit for almost identical route of the petitioner on

the ground that, it is mofussil service, regular permit was sanctioned.

Petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application before the respondents 1 and 2

requesting to give the certified copy of the document whereby the earlier

decision of the RTI Ernakulam fixing the city limit was fixed while

granting city permits in Kochi city to the petitioner as well as others.

Lamenting that the above application is still under consideration without

being disposed of, petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

2. Heard the learned Senior Government Pleader and learned

counsel for the petitioner.

3. According to the learned Senior Government Pleader, all the

records in relation to the above are not available.

4. Having considered the limited prayer sought by the petitioner

herein, I am inclined to direct the authority to take up Ext.P6 and dispose

it of in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and to issue

certified copy of the documents, if available, within a period of one month W.P(C).471/2021

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

                                                SUNIL THOMAS

Sbna                                                   JUDGE
 W.P(C).471/2021





                         APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1           TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER
                     DATED 23.10.2018.

EXHIBIT P2           TRUE COPY OF THE TIME SCHEDULE      OF   THE
                     PETITIONER DATED 1.02.2008.

EXHIBIT P3           TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION IN ITEM NO.37
                     DATED 18/09/2019.

EXHIBIT P4           TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER      IN   WPC
                     NO.19427/2020 DATED 22.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P5           TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF CITY PERMITS IN
                     KOCHI CITY.

EXHIBIT P6           TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 31.12.2020.