Thomas George vs Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 7044 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.3982 OF 2021(W)


PETITIONER:

              THOMAS GEORGE
              AGED 66 YEARS
              S/O GEORGE,.PALLIKKAL HOUSE,
              YMCA COLONY,SHORNUR,PALAKKAD.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.M.JITHESH MENON
              SMT.K.INDU (POURNAMI)
              SRI.P.G.MAHESHKUMAR
              SRI.R.BRIJESH

RESPONDENT:

              SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
              PALAKKAD,CIVIL LINES,PALAKKAD,
              PIN-678001.


OTHER PRESENT:

              SR.GP BIMAL K NATH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.3982 OF 2021(W)
                                    2



                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of March 2021

The petitioner approached this Court contending

that Ext.P2 application for revision of timing in respect of

stage carriage on the route Thozhupadam - Pattambi

has not been finalised and sought for finalising the

timing. This Court by Ext.P3 judgment dated 7.06.2019,

directed the respondent to pass an order within a period

of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Now, the petitioner has come up again

contending that Ext.P2 and later Ext.P5 request for

revision of timings have not been considered by the

respondent.

2. The learned Senior Government Pleader on

instructions submitted that though notice was issued,

objections were raised and timing conference was fixed,

due to spread of pandemic, meeting could not held.

3. It is evident that Ext.P3 judgment was

pronounced in 07.06.2019. The pandemic arose in WP(C).No.3982 OF 2021(W)

March, 2020. Virtually, the respondent was sleeping over

the direction of this Court, which is a conduct liable to be

deprecated and a matter to be seriously looked upon.

However, granting one opportunity to the respondent

herein, to comply with the direction, there will be a

direction to the respondent to call for a report from the

AMVI and on the basis of it, after hearing the objectors,

pass final order on Ext.P2 and Ext.P5, within a period of

six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

4. If for any reason, it is likely that the above

process cannot be completed within the above period,

due to reasons beyond his control, he shall on the basis

of the AMVI report and considering the objections raised,

shall consider Ext.P2 as provisional timing and issue

orders within four weeks as above. It is made clear, if

the second option is availed by the respondent,

provisional timing will continue till the final orders are

passed in a timing conference. This will not confer any

right on the petitioner to insist that provisional timing WP(C).No.3982 OF 2021(W)

should be adopted as the final timing. It is informed to

the respondent that if for any reason, the above order is

not complied within the stipulated time, unpleasant

orders will follow. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is

disposed of.

For reporting compliance post on 29.03.2021.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE SKP/2-3 WP(C).No.3982 OF 2021(W)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE RESPONDENT DATED 21.3.2000 ISSUING A SET OF TIMINGS TO THE PETITIONER'S SERVICE

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.3.2019 WITH THE PROPOSED TIMINGS.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C)N.15567/2019 DATED 7-6-2019

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE EXTRACT OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.2.2020 RELATING TO ITEM 5

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 15.1.2021.

RESPONDENTS'S EXHIBITS:NIL

TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE