Kerala High Court
Haneefa vs M.Vijayan on 20 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
Wednesday, the 20th day of October 2021 / 28th Aswina, 1943
IA.NO.1/2021 IN UNNUMBERED WA NO..../2021 (FILING NO,21735 OF 2021)
AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 22.09.2020 IN WP(C) 19439/2020 OF THIS COURT.
---
PETITIONER/APPELLANT/3RD PARTY:
HANEEFA,S/O.ABDDURAHIMAN, AGED 55,
ADEEPATT HOUSE,B.P.ANGADI,TIRUR,MALAPPURAM.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER & RESPONDENT IN WP(C):
1.M.VIJAYAN,S/O.PANHAN,MALAYIL HOUSE,K.PURAM,
THANALUR,TANUR,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
2.THE SECRETARY,REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
CUM REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
COLLECTORATE P.O., MALAPPURAM-676 505.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to grant leave to file
the writ appeal, in the interest of justice.
This Application coming on for orders on 20/10/2021 upon perusing
the application and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon
hearing the arguments of M/S.I.DINESH MENON & M.JITHESH MENON, ADVOCATES
for the petitioner and of SRI.TEK CHAND, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
respondent 2, the court on the same day passed the following:
P.T.O.
S.MANIKUMAR, C.J. & SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
----------------------------------
I.A.No.1 of 2021 in
Unnumbered W.A. of 2021
(F.No.21735 OF 2021)
----------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of October, 2021
ORDER
S.MANIKUMAR, C.J.
Being aggrieved by the directions contained in the judgment in W.P.
(C)No.19439/2020, dated 22.09.2020, Mr.Haneefa has filed I.A.No.1 of 2021
seeking leave to prefer an appeal.
2. Directions issued by the writ court in the judgment in W.P.
(C)No.19439/2020, dated 22.09.2020 are as hereunder:
"a) The respondent shall obtain a report from the Motor Vehicles
Inspector and ensure that the provisional timings offered by the
petitioner and noted in Exhibit P1 do not clash with the timings of
other vehicles operating on the same route. If there is a likelihood
of a clash of timings, the timing shall be modified accordingly. On
the basis of the same, the respondent shall revise the timings
provisionally within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the timing so fixed
shall be provisional in nature.
b) The above direction shall be subject to settlement of timings
formally at a timing conference which shall be scheduled by the
concerned authority. If the situation is not conducive to hold an
open meeting in physical mode, the respondent may hold the
conference virtually, if there are no other impediments.
c) It is also made clear that the issuance of the permit with
provisional timing as directed in direction (a) above will not be seen
as conferring any right on the petitioner to insist on the same
timings at the time of settlement of the timings at the formal
meeting to be convened by the Regional Transport Authority as per
direction (b)."
I.A.No.1 of 2021 in Unno. W.A. of 2021
(F.No.21735 OF 2021)
:: 2 ::
3. Reasons assigned in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.1 of 2020
seeking leave are as hereunder:
"2. I am an affected person by the impugned judgment of the
learned Single Judge dated 22.9.2020 in W.P.(C)No.19439/2020
wherein I am not made party. I am a participant while the timings
of the first respondent was settled and hence I am a necessary party
while revising the timings of the 2nd respondent.
3. The findings of the learned Single Judge is against the
provisions of law, earlier judgments of this Hon Court and hence it
is liable to be interfered at the hands of this Hon Court. Since I am
necessary party and not made party in the above writ petition and
the impugned judgment seriously affects me, I prefer this writ
appeal with leave of this Honourable Court."
4. Our attention was also invited to the decision of this court in
Krishnankutty v. John reported in 1992 KHC 464, M.C.Kumaran v. K.M.Jacob and
another reported in 1995 KHC 214 and a Division Bench judgment of this court
in W.A.936 of 2021 dated 9th August 2021 wherein this court has set aside the
directions issued by the writ court as regards the timing suggested by the writ
petitioners therein.
I.A.No.1 of 2021 in Unno. W.A. of 2021
(F.No.21735 OF 2021)
:: 3 ::
5. Mr.I.Dinesh Menon, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
provisional timing conference in respect of stage carriage No.KL-55/M 5816 is
scheduled on 22.10.2021. If the provisional timing conference is scheduled and
finalised on 22.10.2021, then the instant writ appeal would become infructuous.
6. In such a view of the matter, we direct the Secretary, Regional
Transport Authority cum Regional Transport Officer/respondent No.2 to
postpone the provisional timing conference by ten days.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the petitioner
has made out a prima facie case for grant of leave. Leave is granted. Registry is
directed to number the writ appeal.
Mr.Tek Chand, learned Senior Government Pleader takes notice for the
second respondent/Secretary, Regional Transport Authority cum Regional
Transport Officer.
sd/-
S.MANIKUMAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
jes
20-10-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
