IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 19839 of 2008(J)
1. K.M.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY
... Respondent
2. M.K.NAFEESA, W/O. K.K.KOYA
For Petitioner :SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNA MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :02/07/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
===============
W.P.(C) NO. 19839 OF 2008 J
====================
Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner submits that the 2nd respondent had complained that the
petitioner is operating on routes outside the permit. On this basis, the 2nd
respondent has filed an application before the 1st respondent and sought
revision of the petitioner’s timing as well. Thereafter she approached this
court and secured Ext.P3 judgment directing the 1st respondent to consider
the objections.
2. The petitioner submits that the objection raised and the
request for revision of timings sought for by the 2nd respondent are totally
untenable and raising this plea, petitioner has filed Ext.P4. In this writ
petition what is sought for by the petitioner is a direction to the 1st
respondent to consider Ext.P4 and pass orders thereon.
3. On the above facts, I do not think there is any reason to
decline the limited relief that is sought for by the petitioner.
4. Therefore, taking into account the above facts submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of
directing that if Ext.P4 has been received, the 1st respondent shall take up
WPC 19839/08
:2 :
and consider Ext.P4 also along with the application filed by the 2nd
respondent which is directed to be considered in Ext.P3 judgment.
Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st
respondent for compliance.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp