IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 16361 of 2009(M)
1. RAMAKRISHNAN.M., MELEPATT HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.I.DINESH MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :09/07/2009
O R D E R
V.GIRI, J.
----------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No.16361 of 2009
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 9th day of July, 2009.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner operates a regular stage
carriage bearing registration No.Kl-9/K565, on the
route Pattambi-Kayiliyad and the timings in relation to
the same was settled as per Ext.P2. According to the
petitioner, the Secretary has settled the timings by
Ext.P2 after regular permit was granted by the RTA,
Palakkad. But, there was a variation in respect of
commencement from Kayiliyad to Koppam via
Puthiyaroad at 12.02 PM. This could have proceeded
via Vallapuzha and Malayankavu, which was a route
granted by the Regional Transport Authority. A new
entrant to the field took note of this variation and
complained that the petitioner was not operating his
vehicle on the route granted by the Regional
Transport Authority. A check report was drawn up and
the petitioner’s permit was cancelled under Ext.P3.
W.P.(C).No.16361 of 2009
:: 2 ::
The petitioner preferred an appeal before the State
Transport Appellate Tribunal, wherein he expressed
his willingness to compound the offence. The tribunal
set aside the cancellation of the permit and directed
the Regional Transport Authority, to permit the
petitioner to compound the offence.
2. The Regional Transport Authority, after
remand, again affirmed its earlier decision vide
Ext.P5 on the premise that the vehicle was not used
in accordance with the permit. This was again
challenged by the petitioner before the tribunal. The
tribunal by Ext.P7 set aside Ext.P5 and directed the
Regional Transport Authority, to proceed in terms of
its earlier judgment. The petitioner’s grievance is that
he is not now in a position to operate either in
accordance with the varied permit granted by the
Regional Transport Authority as per Ext.P5 or as per
the timings settled as per Ext.P2, which was, in effect,
set aside. Hence this writ petition.
W.P.(C).No.16361 of 2009
:: 3 ::
3. Learned Government Pleader submits
that the timings will be settled in accordance with the
permit Ext.P1. This shall be done as early as possible.
The writ petition is disposed of directing the
respondent to settle the timings in conformity with
Ext.P1 permit, taking note of Ext.P7 judgment of the
State Transport Appellate Tribunal, within three
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment.
Sd/-
(V.GIRI)
JUDGE
sk/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge