High Court Kerala High Court

T.S. Sukumaran vs Regional Transport Officer on 18 November, 2010

Kerala High Court
T.S. Sukumaran vs Regional Transport Officer on 18 November, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 34397 of 2010(Y)


1. T.S. SUKUMARAN, SAROJA BHAVAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,

3. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.N.MOHANAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :18/11/2010

 O R D E R
                           C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
                    --------------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C). NO.34397 OF 2010
                    --------------------------------------------

                 Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010

                                 JUDGMENT

The petitioner is a stage carriage operator on the route Perambra-

Peruvannamoozhi, Poozhithod-Muthukad operating with five stage

carriages. The main grievance of the petitioner is that unmindful of the

statutory inhibitions, certain persons are operating parallel services on the

said route. Though the said aspect was brought to the notice of the

concerned authorities viz., respondents 1 to 3, they are not taking any

effective steps to curb the parallel services being operated by some

unknown persons. The petitioner further contends that being a person,

who is operating the stage carriage service based on the strength of valid

permits, he is bound to pay the quarterly tax. However, his business is

adversely affected by the unauthorised parallel services being operated on

the said route, it is further submitted. Necessarily, when the petitioner

makes such a serious complaint, the authorities are bound to act upon the

same to curb such parallel services. The authorities cannot disuse their

power and in fact, they are bound to take effective steps to curb any such

illegal and unauthorised parallel services. The petitioner has yet another

W.P.(C) NO.34397/2010 2

grievance. Since the respondents have failed to take appropriate steps on

the aforesaid matter, he should be given an extended time for paying the

quarterly tax. I do not think that the inaction on the part of the respondents

on the aforesaid aspect could be a reason for getting extended period for

payment of quarterly tax. When the petitioner is bound to pay the

quarterly tax within a stipulated time, he is bound to pay the same within

the said stipulated period. However, with respect to the grievance raised

by the petitioner regarding unauthorised and illegal operation of parallel

services, the respondents are bound to take effective steps in accordance

with the provisions. Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a

direction to the respondents to consider the complaints preferred by the

petitioner, viz., Exts.P3 to P6 and to take appropriate actions thereon,

expeditiously.

(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

spc

W.P.(C) NO.34397/2010 3

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

JUDGMENT

September, 2010

W.P.(C) NO.34397/2010 4