Kamarudheen C.H vs Regional Transport Authority
2021 Latest Caselaw 20747 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 13TH ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 21114 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          KAMARUDHEEN C.H., AGED 45 YEARS
          S/O RASAQ, CHERUVATH HOUSE,
          KEEZHAPALLY, ARALAM, KANNUR DISTRICT.

          BY ADV I.DINESH MENON



RESPONDENTS:

    1     REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
          KANNUR, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION.P.O,
          KANNUR-670001.

    2     THE SECRETARY,REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
          KANNUR, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION.P.O,
          KANNUR-670001.

    3     THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
          CHIEF OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695034.

          BY ADV P.C.CHACKO(PARATHANAM)

          SMT. SURYA BINOY- SR. G.P




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21114 OF 2021
                                2


                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a

direction to the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Kannur, to

pass orders on Exts.P4 and P5 applications for renewal and

variation respectively on the restricted route of Ulikkal -

Kozhikode, which he says is only 118 kms., in respect of his

vehicle bearing No.KL-78 A 305, in lieu of the basic route of

Ulikkal - Kozhikode; and to issue appropriate orders thereon

within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. I have heard Sri.I.Dinesh Menon, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner; Smt.Surya Binoy, learned Senior

Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned

Standing Counsel - Sri.P.C.Chacko for the 3rd respondent -

Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC).

3. Smt.Surya Binoy, learned Senior Government Pleader,

submitted that if the petitioner only requires consideration of

his aforementioned applications, there does not appear to be

any legal impediment for the RTA in doing so; but prayed that

this Court may not make any affirmative declarations in favour

of the petitioner and leave it to the said respondent to take an WP(C) NO. 21114 OF 2021

appropriate decision thereon, as per law.

4. Sri.P.C.Chacko, learned Standing Counsel for the

KSRTC, however, submitted that the RTA be directed to

complete the proceedings on the applications of the petitioner

only after verifying that the route is within 140 kms, as is

required under law. He submitted that, therefore, if required,

the RTA may be directed to hear the Authorized Official of the

KSRTC also.

5. When I consider the afore submissions, it is without

doubt that if the petitioner's applications for renewal and

variation of the permit are still pending before the RTA, then

the same will require to be considered and disposed of, after

hearing him, as also the Authorized Official of the KSRTC.

6. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and

direct the 1st respondent - RTA to take up Exts.P4 and P5

applications of the petitioner and dispose it of, after affording

him, as also the Authorized Official of the KSRTC an

opportunity of being heard - either physically or through video

conferencing - thus culminating in an appropriate order

thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two WP(C) NO. 21114 OF 2021

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

7. Needless to say, if no meeting of the RTA is held within

the above time frame, then the directions above shall be

completed through circulation.

8. At this time, Sri.I.Dinesh Menon - learned counsel for

the petitioner, pleaded that the 2nd respondent - Secretary of

RTA be directed to consider Ext.P6 application for temporary

permit. Since I notice that similar directions have been issued

by this Court in analogous matters, including in Ext.P8

judgment, I deem it appropriate to accede to this request.

I consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P6

and issue appropriate orders thereon, adverting to my

observations and directions above, within a period of two weeks

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

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 21114 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21114/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT OF THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER GO(MS NO.45/2015 DATED 20.8.2015.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)NO.22/2020/TRANS DATED 01.07.2020.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL DATED 26.6.2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR VARIATION DATED 26.6.2021.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT APPLICATION DATED 29.9.2021.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WP(C)NO.14623/2021 DATED 12.8.2021.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.17631/2021 DATED 02.09.2021.