Kerala High Court
Linson E.K vs The Cochin International Airport Ltd on 6 February, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 33928 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
LINSON E.K., AGED 26 YEARS
S/O E.V. KUNJUMON, ERALIL (H), ATHANI P.O.,
NEDUMBASSERY, KOCHI-683585.
R.SANJITH
C.S.SINDHU KRISHNAH
P.S.ANJU
SURAJ KRISHNAN
SHALU JOSE
RAHUL S.NATH
SIDHI K. KUTTY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR KOCHI-683 111.
2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, COCHIN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
LTD, KOCHI AIRPORT.P.O, ERNAKULAM-683 111.
3 SONY VARGHESE, AGED 62, S/O. VARGHESE, PUTHENKUDY
HOUSE, IRINGOL P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM- 683545.
4 THE TAXI OPERATORS CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. THE COCHIN INTERNATIONAL
AIRPORT LTD, NEDUMBASSERRY, KOCHI AIRPORT. P.O,
ERNAKULAM-683111.
WP(C) NO. 33928 OF 2022
2
P.BENNY THOMAS
P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE
D.PREM KAMATH
TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL)
ABEL TOM BENNY
KURIAN OOMMEN THERAKATH
JAIKRISHNAN.M.PISHARODI
K.S.MUHAMMED SHEFIN
TONY THOMAS (INCHIPARAMBIL)
E.S.FIROS
AMRUTHA K.P.
SRADHA MOHAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 33928 OF 2022
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner alleges that the third respondent has been
issued Taxi permit/Vehicle Pass unauthorisedly and unlawfully,
based on Ext.P1 Land Acquisition Certificate; and therefore,
that he has preferred Ext.P2 representation before the second
respondent, thus seeking that it be directed to be taken up and
disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. In response, Sri.P.Benny Thomas, appearing for
respondents 1 and 2, submitted that Ext.P2 representation of
the petitioner has already seized the attention of the second
respondent and that a final decision thereon will be taken by
him, after hearing the petitioner and the third respondent.
3. Sri.P.Thomas Geevarghese, appearing for the third
respondent, submitted that, though his client does not stand in
the way of Ext.P2 being considered by the second respondent,
it may be ordered that they will also be given an opportunity of
being heard during such processes.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition and
direct the competent Authority of the second respondent to
take up Ext.P2 representation of the petitioner and dispose it
WP(C) NO. 33928 OF 2022
of, after affording an opportunity of being heard to him, as also
to the third respondent; thus culminating in an appropriate
order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is
possible, but not later than two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
stu
WP(C) NO. 33928 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33928/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND ACQUISITION
CERTIFICATE BEARING NO. 64/99 DATED
19/01/2013.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY
THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.
(C).NO. 28481 OF 2018.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R3(a) TRUE COPY OF TAXI-PERMIT ISSUED TO THE
3RD RESPONDENT BY CIAL.
Exhibit R3(b) TRUE COPY OF MEMBERSHIP ID OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT WITH 4TH RESPONDENT SOCIETY.
Exhibit R3(c) TRUE COPY OF AFFIDAVIT/LETTER OF CONSENT
ISSUED BY LATE E V VARGHESE, DATED 7TH
OCTOBER 2013.
Exhibit R3(d) TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE OF EV
VARGHESE.
