National Development Trust vs The Kerala State Road Transport on 2 January, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 36947 of 2008(W)


1. NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT TRUST, REG. NO.
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (OPERATIONS),

3. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :02/01/2009

 O R D E R
                           ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                          ==============
                    W.P.(C) NO. 36947 OF 2008 (W)
                    ====================

                Dated this the 2nd day of January, 2009

                               J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a charitable trust with its office at Trivandrum,

which has established a Nursing College at Nedumangad. By Ext.P5, they

applied to the KSRTC for issuing concession passes in order to enable the

students to avail of concessional fares. According to the petitioner, they

have submitted all documents in support of their claim, including Exts. P1

to P4. However, the KSRTC by Ext.P7 called for additional documents

which according to the petitioner have already been furnished. It is also

stated that the petitioner has no further document to produce. Petitioner

submits that the refusal of the KSRTC in passing orders is for the reason

that their registered office is situated in Trivandrum and that their college

is located at Nedumangad.

2. On the other hand, the standing counsel for the KSRTC makes

it clear that they have called for additional documents as they were not

satisfied with the documents which were already produced.

3. As the petitioner has no further documents to produce, the

KSRTC may take a final decision on Ext.P5 application made by the

petitioner, based on the documents which are already made available.

WPC 36947/08
:2 :

However, it is clarified that the fact that the petitioner’s office is in

Trivandrum and that their college is located at Nedumangad by itself may

not be relevant in deciding the matter. The claim of the petitioner as

raised in Ext.P5 will have to be decided on merits untramelled by the

above. This the 1st respondent shall do, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp