Kerala High Court
Sunilkumar.S.M vs Regional Transport Authority, ... on 5 September, 2024
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
W. P. (C) No. 14694 of 2024
-1-
2024:KER:68264
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 14694 OF 2024
PETITIONER/S:
SUNILKUMAR.S.M.
AGED 39 YEARS
S/O.SURENDRAN, DHANYA BHAVAN, NEAR POLICE
STATION, VENJARAMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN -
695607
BY ADV P.K.PRIYA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ATTINGAL
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695101
2 THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695101
3 RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
AGED 75 YEARS
S/O. (LATE) MADHAVAN PILLAI, KULANGARA VEEDU,
VALANCHERRY, KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN
- 695601
BY ADVS.
BINU GEORGE
HEMALATHA(K/1287/1999)
AMANTA MATHEW(K/001960/2022)
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. BINOY DAVIS-GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.09.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W. P. (C) No. 14694 of 2024
-2-
2024:KER:68264
JUDGMENT
The present writ petition has been filed for the following
reliefs:-
"i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents 1
and 2 to consider objections raised by the petitioner as
against the operation of the 3rd respondent on the varied route
Kilimanoor-Venjaramoodu Via Vellalloor, Kallambalam,
Varkala, Kappil, Paravoor, Attingal, Avanavancherry and
Poovathinmoodu by curtailing the first and last trip between
Paravoor and Kallambalam;
ii. issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or order or direction to the respondents 1
and 2 to reinstate the permit given to the 3 rd respondent on
the route Paravoor, Venjaramoodu Via Kappil, Varkala,
Kallambalam, Attingal, Avanavancherry and
Poovathinmoodu."
2. Petitioner has moved Ext. P5 representation before the
2nd respondent for the variation in permit granted in respect of the
stage carriage KL-07-AR-6285 on the route Attingal - Varkala
via Kallambalam.
2024:KER:68264
3. The learned Government Pleader however submits
that the remedy against the order granting variation in the permit,
if any, to the petitioner is not before the 2nd respondent by filing
representation but to challenge the said decision of the RTA
before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner however
submits that the application filed in Ext. P5 has not been given
any consideration and if it is not maintainable, the 2 nd respondent
may reject the application but cannot keep the application
pending.
Considering the said submission of the parties, the
present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2 nd
respondent to pass appropriate orders on Ext. P5 representation of
the petitioner, in accordance with law, preferably within a period
of one month.
Sd/-
DINESH KUMAR SINGH
JUDGE
Eb
2024:KER:68264
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14694/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LEASE AGREEMENT
EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER AND SHIBU
DATED 22.10.2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT TO SHIBU DATED
16.02.2022.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL FILED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT FOR VARIATION AND THE
SAME WAS CONSIDERED AS ITEM NO.35 ON
THE RTA MEETING ON 11.06.2009 AND
ALLOWED THE PROPOSAL PUT FORWARD BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE VARIATION FROM
KALLAMBALAM TO KILIMANOOR.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 06.03.2020.
