IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA No. 2722 of 2007()
1. M.N.YASODHARA DEVI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
Dated :19/11/2007
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, CJ. & K. M. JOSEPH, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.A. NO. 2722 OF 2007
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th November, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L. DATTU, CJ.
This Appeal arises out of the Order passed by the learned Single
Judge in W.P.(C). No.28946/07 dated 3.10.2007.
2. Smt. M.N. Yasodhara Devi, was the petitioner before the learned
Single Judge in the Writ Petition.
3. The appellant/petitioner had applied for grant of a Stage Carriage
Regular Permit on the route Ernakulam – Pala as L.S.O.S. The request so
made, was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam (RTA).
Petitioner being aggrieved by the said order of the Regional Transport
Authority, had filed an Appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal
(STAT) in M.V.A.A. No.1031/03. The STAT by Order dated 23.7.2004, had
allowed the Appeal and set aside the order passed by the RTA, Kottayam
and further had directed the RTA to grant regular permit in favour of the
petitioner on the aforesaid route for the vehicle bearing registration No.KL-
5/B-9570.
4. The RTA, after receipt of the orders passed by the STAT, was
pleased to pass yet another order in No.G1/36339/04/K. dated 28.9.2004.
The order passed by the RTA is as under:
“Heard. Perused the Judgment of Hon’ble STAT in
MVAA No.1031/03. Regular permit granted subject to
timings and subject to counter signature.”
WA 2722/07 2
5. Since the order passed by the RTA had not been implemented in
spite of long lapse of time, the petitioner was before this Court in W.P.(C).
No.28946/07. The relief sought in that Writ Petition was to direct the RTA,
Kottayam to implement the orders passed on 28.9.2004 by issuing a Regular
Permit.
6. The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) being
aggrieved by the orders passed by the RTA, Kottayam in granting Permits to
various operators under the Supplemental Scheme, had approached this
Court in W.P.(C). No.33897/04 and connected matters. This Court had
disposed of the Writ Petition by Order dated 7.4.2006 and in that, had
granted permission to the KSRTC to approach the concerned Regional
Transport Authority in the light of the amendments carried out in the
Supplemental Scheme issued by the State Government. The learned Single
Judge had further observed that if such objections are filed by the KSRTC,
the RTA will consider the objections so filed, after issuing appropriate notice
to the appellant herein.
7. The learned Single Judge by Order dated 3.10.2007 disposed of
W.P.(C). No.28946/07 filed by the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order,
the petitioner in the Writ Petition is before us in this Writ Appeal.
8. The one and the only prayer that was sought for by Smt.M.N.
Yasodhara Devi in the Writ Petition that was filed, was to implement Ext.P2
order passed by the RTA, Kottayam who, by its order dated 28.9.2004 had
granted regular permit to the petitioner subject of the timings and subject to
the counter-signature pursuant to the direction issued by the STAT in
WA 2722/07 3
M.V.A.A. No.1031/03.
9. The KSRTC, aggrieved by the order so passed by the RTA in a
number of cases granting Regular Permits, had approached this Court. This
Court had disposed of the Writ Petition and had permitted the KSRTC to
move the Regional Transport Authority, to modify the orders passed by them
in granting regular permit.
10. In our opinion, in view of the orders passed by the learned Single
Judge, which have become final in the Writ Petition filed by the KSRTC, it
may not be possible for this Court to grant the request of the petitioner.
Keeping this aspect of the matter in view, the learned Single Judge has rightly
rejected the Writ Petition and the order so passed, does not call for our
interference. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal requires to be rejected and it is
rejected.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE
K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE
kbk/dk.