Kerala High Court
Rahul Tom vs Regional Transport ... on 21 October, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 29TH ASWINA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 33685 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
RAHUL TOM
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O THOMAS, KONDODIKKAL HOUSE,
KODIMATHA, KOTTAYAM-686001.
BY ADV I.DINESH MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,IDUKKI
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, IDUKKI-685503.
2 THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, IDUKKI-685603.
3 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
CHIEF OFFICE, FORT P.O., TRIVANDRUM-685934
OTHER PRESENT:
0
SRI.V.K.SUNIL, SR.GP,
SRI.DEEPU THANKAN, SC(KSRTC)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 21.10.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.33685/2022
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.33685 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 21st day of October, 2022
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with following prayers:
i. Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writs,
order or direction, directing the respondent,
Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Idukki to
consider Ext.P5 application for temporary permit
of the Act on the restricted route Ettumanoor-
Katappana in respect of SC KL-33 J 420, till a
decision taken on the application for renewal.
ii. To issue such other writs, order or direction as
this Honorable Court may deem fit and
appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the
case.
(SIC)
2. Petitioner is the holder of a regular permit on the
route Kottayam-Kattappana. According to the petitioner, the
route length is beyond 140 kms. Since there is an ongoing
dispute as to whether existing operators could operate beyond
WP(C).No.33685/2022
140 kms in the light of the amendment brought in in Rule
2(oa) of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules, an application for
variation was submitted. No orders are passed on the
application for renewal or on the application for variation. The
petitioner submitted an application for temporary permit
restricting the route to 137 kms, as evident by Ext.P5. The
grievance of the petitioner is that the same is not considered.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader.
4. After hearing both sides, I think this writ petition
can be disposed of directing the 1 st respondent to consider
Ext.P5 within a time frame.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the
following manner:
The 1st respondent is directed to
consider Ext.P5 application for
temporary permit on the restricted
route Ettumanoor-Kattappana (137 kms)
in respect of stage carriage bearing
registration No.KL-33/J-420 if there is
no other legal impediment, as
WP(C).No.33685/2022
expeditiously as possible, at any rate,
within two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
WP(C).No.33685/2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33685/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT ISSUED
TO THE PETITIONER DATED NIL.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RENEWAL APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
2.9.2019.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE VARIATION APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
14.10.2022.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TEMPORARY PERMIT
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED
1.7.2022.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY PERMIT SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITION DATED 18.10.2022.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP[C] NO.
21270/2022 DATED 29.6.2022
