Kerala High Court
T.P. Mohammed vs The Secretary on 1 June, 2012
Author: K.Surendra Mohan
Bench: K.Surendra Mohan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/11TH JYAISHTA 1934
WP(C).No. 11897 of 2012 (J)
---------------------------
PETITIONERS:
------------
1. T.P. MOHAMMED,
THEKKEPANIKKAL HOUSE, P.O.PAINGANNOOR,
KUTTIPPURAM, MALAPPURAM.
2. K.V.GOPALAN,
ACHUTHA NIVAS, POTHANNOOR,
POLPAKARA, EDAPPAL.
3. T.MOHAMMED HANEEFA,
THURAKKAL HOUSE, KUTTIPPURAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
4. T.KUNHIMOHAMMED,
S/O. P.HAMZA, PARAMAL HOUSE, KUTTIPPURAM.
5. MOHAMMED ABOOBACKER,
MANNARATHODY HOUSE,
ADAVANADPARA, TIRUR.
6. P.T.MOHAMMEDKUTTY,
PADATHARAKKAL HOUSE,
P.O.ALATHIYOOR, TIRUR.
7. MOHAMMED C.P,
CHAMAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
NARUKRA P.O., MALAPPURAM.
8. MOHAMMED M.K,
MAVUMKUNNATH HOUSE,
TRIPRANCODE P.O.
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
9. ABDUL RASHEED,
POCHATH HOUSE,
P.O.CHEKANUR, EDAPPAL,
MALAPPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR
SMT.G.CHITRA
WP(C).No. 11897 of 2012 (J) - 2 -
RESPONDENTS:
------------
1. THE SECRETARY,
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001.
2. K.ABOOBACKER
S/O. MAMMAD,
MODALIPULIKOTTIL HOUSE,
PULPETTA POST,
MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-672 123.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI G.GOPAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 11897 of 2012 (J)
A P P E N D I X
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE AGENDA ALONG WITH THE
PROPOSED TIMINGS OF THE MEETING HELD ON 30.6.2011 IN ITEM NO.29.
EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC
NO.5412/2011 DTD.30.3.2011.
EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT
AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD, DTD.30.6.2011 GRANTING REGULAR PERMIT TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC
NO.1860/2012 DTD.30.1.2012.
EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT
AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD, DTD.7.2.2012.
EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT
NO.G1/73007/2007/P DTD.24.4.2012.
EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 6TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 7TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 8TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE 9TH PETITIONER BEFORE
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.27.4.2012.
/True copy/
P.A to Judge
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P(c) No.11897 of 2012-J
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2012
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners, who are stage carriage operators conducting services on the route Koppam - Tirur via Pallipuram and Kuttippuram, have filed this Writ Petition aggrieved by the manner in which Ext.P6 proceedings have been issued by the 1st respondent. As per Ext.P6, a fresh regular permit has been issued to the 2nd respondent and a set of provisional timings have been allotted to him, accepting his proposal for the same. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, Ext.P6 is in gross violation of the order of this Court, Ext.P4. It is the further case of the petitioners that Ext.P4 itself has been passed on the basis of wrong instructions given in Court by the learned Government Pleader. Since Ext.P6 states that the timings are purely provisional and subject to written objections that may be preferred against them, the petitioners have already submitted Exts.P7 to P15 objections. According to the petitioners, the objections have not been considered so far. W.P(c) No.11897 of 2012-J 2 Consequently, the 2nd respondent is alleged to be enjoying the benefits of the ill gotten order.
2. The learned Government Pleader, who represents the 1st respondent, assures that the objections Exts.P7 to P15 would be considered and appropriate orders passed, without delay.
3. In view of the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider the objections submitted by the petitioners, evidenced herein by Exts.P7 to P15, by convening a Timing Conference and to pass appropriate orders thereon settling the timings of the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/