Muhammed Siril vs Regional Transport Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 364 Ker

WP(C).No.26834 OF 2020(D)
                                    1

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

  WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.26834 OF 2020(D)


PETITIONER:

               MUHAMMED SIRIL
               AGED 50 YEARS
               NEERAKATTIL HOUSE, CHERUVANNUR P.O., VALAVANNUR,
               KALAPANCHERY, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
               POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SEDDEEK NEERAKKATTIL,
               S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY HAJI, NEERAKATTIL HOUSE,
               CHERUVANNUR P.O., VALAVANNUR, KALPAKANCHERY, TIRUR,
               MALAPPURAM.

               BY ADV. SRI.STALIN PETER DAVIS

RESPONDENTS:

      1        REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
               MALAPPURAM, CIVIL STATION, DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM-
               676 505.

      2        THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
               REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, DOWN
               HILL, MALAPPURAM-676 505.

      3        DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
               KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, DOWN HILL,
               MALAPPURAM-676 505.

               R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM)

OTHER PRESENT:

               SR.GP BIMAL K NATH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.26834 OF 2020(D)
                               2




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6th day of January 2021

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Standing Counsel for the KSRTC. The grievance of

the petitioner herein is that Ext.P1 application has been

pending since long. It is stated that the matter was taken

up on 07.01.2020 and was adjourned sine die. Thereafter,

Ext.P4 modified proposal was filed. The grievance of the

petitioner is that even now no orders have been passed on

both Ext.P1 and Ext.P4.

2. Having considered the entire facts and after

having heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Government Pleader as well as the learned

Standing Counsel for KSRTC, I am inclined to direct the

first respondent to take up and consider Ext.P1 and Ext.P4

and to pass appropriate order in accordance with law, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of

six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this WP(C).No.26834 OF 2020(D)

judgment. The KSRTC shall also be given an opportunity

of being heard.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/6-1 WP(C).No.26834 OF 2020(D)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE CHALAN DATED 21.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF 1ST MOTOR VEHICLES INSPECTORS REPORT DATED 29.11.2019.

EXHIBIT P3 A COPY ADJOURNED PROCEEDINGS OF REGULAR PERMIT APPLICATION 07.01.2020.

EXHIBIT P4 A COPY MODIFIED PROPOSAL DATED 22.09.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 A COPY OF THE 2ND MOTOR VEHICLES INSPECTOR REPORT DATED 30.09.2020.

RESPONDENTS'S EXHIBITS: NIL

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE