Kanakalatha vs The Secretary
2021 Latest Caselaw 8320 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

     FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.4522 OF 2021(M)


PETITIONER:

              KANAKALATHA
              AGED 42 YEARS
              W/O SIVAPRASAD,
              2/234, MINI NIVAS,
              ERINAYUR,
              POOMKULAM,
              ALATHUR,
              PALAKKAD-678541.

              BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON

RESPONDENT:

              THE SECRETARY,
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
              PALAKKAD,
              REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE,
              CIVIL STATION P O,
              PALAKKAD-678001.


OTHER PRESENT:

              SR.GP BIMAL K NATH

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.4522 OF 2021(M)

                                   2




                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 12th day of March 2021

The petitioner is a regular permit holder in respect of

vehicle No. KL-09-W59. He applied for variation of

conditions of permit after settling of the timing. The above

application is Ext. P3. The grievance of the petitioner is

that, the above application has not been taken up inspite

of considerable delay.

2. Having heard both sides, I am inclined to

dispose of directing the 1st respondent to call for a field

report from the concerned AMVI and after satisfying

himself that the provisional set of timing now offered by

the petitioner by virtue of Ext.P3 does not clash with the

existing timings allotted en route operators and if there is

any clash of timing by modifying the provisional timing and

to issue a provisional timing within a period of four weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is WP(C).No.4522 OF 2021(M)

made clear that, this timing will be strictly provisional and

shall not give right to the petitioner to insist that this

should be treated as the final timing. This timing will

continue till final timing is settled in an appropriate timing

conference to be convened later in accordance with law.

The writ petition is disposed of.

                                            (Sd/-)

                                      SUNIL THOMAS,
         LU                              JUDGE
 WP(C).No.4522 OF 2021(M)






                           APPENDIX
   PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

   EXHIBIT P1          TRUE EXTRACT OF THE PROCEEDINGS

GRANTING VARIATION DATED 15.11.2018.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.34679/2019 DATED 18.12.2019.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 12.02.2021.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.14344/2020 DATED 16/7/2020.

// True Copy // PA To Judge