Sakeer Hussain vs The Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 3084 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

     THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 8TH MAGHA, 1942

                        WP(C).No.2248 OF 2021(E)


PETITIONER/S:

      1         SAKEER HUSSAIN,
                AGED 47 YEARS,
                S/O.MOIDEEN, KUMALIL HOUSE, ANATHAVOOR P.O.,
                THIRUNAVAYA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

      2         MUHAMMED BASHEER,
                S/O.ABOOBACKER, ALUNGAL HOUSE, MANGATOOR, EDAPPAL,
                MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

                BY ADV. SRI.STALIN PETER DAVIS

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
                CIVIL STATION, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM-676 505.

      2         PEETHAMBARAN,
                PADEERI HOUSE, KALADI P.O., PIN-679 582, EDAPPAL,
                PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.



                R1 BY SRI BIMAL K NATH SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.2248 OF 2021                   2




                                   JUDGMENT

The petitioners state that they are existing stage carriage operators

operating with fixed timings. The 2nd respondent is a rival operator, who has

requested for revision of timings. The petitioners state that they have serious

grievance as the timings offered by the party respondent is likely to clash with

the timings of the petitioners herein. To avert such a situation, the petitioners

have preferred Exts.P1 and P2 objections before the 1st respondent. Their

prayer in this petition is for a direction to the 1st respondent to dispose of

Exts.P1 and P2 with notice to the parties within a time frame.

2. I have heard Sri. Stalin P. Davis, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioners and Sri. Bimal K.Nath, the learned Senior Government Pleader. It is

submitted by the learned government pleader that there is no impediment in

considering the objection.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, this writ petition is

disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Exts.P1 and P2 objections

at the time of consideration of the application submitted by the party

respondent for revision of timings.

This petition is disposed of with the above directions.

SD/-

                                            RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
  sru                                                   JUDGE



                           APPENDIX
  PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

  EXHIBIT P1            A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY
                        THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
                        RESPONDENT ON 07.01.2021.

  EXHIBIT P2            A TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY
                        THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
                        RESPONDENT ON 07.01.2021.

  RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:     NIL




                               //TRUE COPY//      P.A. TO JUDGE