IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 9857 of 2010(F)
1. M.C.SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 32,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY,
For Petitioner :SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNA MENON
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :24/03/2010
O R D E R
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.9857 of 2010
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a stage carriage operator. He was
earlier conducting services on the route Anchangadi-
Kunnamkulam – Guruvayur – Chavakkad, which was
surrendered. Subsequently, he applied for the issue of a
regular permit over the very same route in the very same
vacancy by offering a vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-8/S 1221.
However, the said application was rejected by the first
respondent on the ground that there was overlapping on
the notified route. The petitioner challenged the same
before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in MVAA
No.247/2007. The appeal was allowed and the matter was
directed to be re-considered on condition that the
petitioner submits a modified application, avoiding the
overlapping, within a month therefrom. Accordingly, the
petitioner submitted Ext.P2 request for modification.
However, no orders have been passed thereon till date.
2. While so, the Government has come out with the
final notification dated 14.7.2009 which permits
wpc No.9857/2010 2
overlapping on the notified route to an extent of 5% of the
route or 5 kms. whichever is less. According to the
petitioner, in the light of the above provision in the final
notification, it is not necessary to modify his earlier
proposal. Therefore, he has submitted Ext.P3
representation. The petitioner seeks appropriate
directions for the consideration of Ext.P3 also while
considering his application for the issue of regular permit.
The learned Senior Government Pleader has no objection
to such a direction being issued.
3. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is
disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the
request of the petitioner contained in Ext.P3 also while
considering his request for the issue of a regular permit in
the light of Ext.P2. Since the application of the petitioner
has been pending since 2007, the matter shall be
considered and appropriate orders passed, expeditiously
and at any rate within a period of two months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
K.SURENDRA MOHAN,
JUDGE
css/