Mabin K.B vs The Secretary, Regional ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 12616 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
     TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 6TH POUSHA, 1944
                       WP(C) NO. 42725 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          MABIN K.B.,
          S/O. LATE BABY K.A, KOOLA HOUSE, KOZHUKKULLY P.O,
          THRISSUR.

          BY ADV I.DINESH MENON



RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
          PALAKKAD, REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION P.O,
          PALAKKAD 678 001.

    2     NANDANAN P.,
          PULLANIKKATTIL HOUSE, KOZHIKKOTTIRI, MUTHUTHALA,
          PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD 679 303.

          SMT. PARVATHY.K -GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 42725 OF 2022             2




                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that his father late Baby K.A. was the

regular permit holder on the route Pattambi - Palakkad.

2. The petitioner states that the 2nd respondent is a new

entrant and is issued with a departure time from Palakkad at 1.51

pm whereas petitioner was issued with a departure time from

Palakkad at 1.53 pm and thereby there is acute clash and

competition between the petitioner's service as well as that of the

2nd respondent's service. The petitioner states that, in order to tide

over the situation, he has preferred Ext. P3 request for averting the

clash of timings between petitioner's service as well as that of the

2nd respondent's service. Since no orders are passed on Ext.P3

request, the limited prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the

1st respondent to consider Ext. P3 request within a time frame.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government pleader for the 1st respondent.

In the nature of the direction I propose to pass notice to the 2 nd

respondent is dispensed with. In the facts and circumstances of the

case, there will be a direction to the 1 st respondent to consider Ext.P3

objection of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, after notice to

the petitioner and the 2nd respondent.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

LEK

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42725/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUING TIMINGS TO THE PETITIONER'S SERVICE DATED 1.12.1999.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ISSUING TIMINGS TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT'S SERVICE DATED 22.7.2022.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 12.12.2022.