Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Anas.Y vs The State Of Kerala

Author: Anil K.Narendran

Bench: Anil K.Narendran

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT:

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

     MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939

                    WP(C).No. 38894 of 2017 (J)
                    ----------------------------

PETITIONER:
--------------

       ANAS.Y, AGED 37 YEARS
       S/O. YOUSUF KUNJU, CHAKKALAYIL VEEDU, MEMNA
       OACHIRA POST, KARUNAGAPPALLY.

       BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH T.JOHN


RESPONDENTS:
------------

     1. THE STATE OF KERALA
       REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
       TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
       THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

     2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
       KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
       TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

     3. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (ADMINISTRATION)
       KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
       TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 023.

     4. THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER
       KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION
       KAYAMKULAM DEPOT, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

       R1 BY Sr.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SHEEJA C.S.
       R2 TO R4 BY SHRI.T.P SAJAN, SC, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
                                       CORPORATION - KSRTC

       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION  ON
04-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 38894 of 2017 (J)
----------------------------

                              APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
---------------------

EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE DUTY PASS ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT TRANSPORT
OFFICER, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KOLLAM DEPOT.

EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05.4.2017 IN TR/1/000011/2017
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 20.4.2017.

EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE RC PARTICULAR IN AUTORICKSHAW BEARING NO.KL
23 B 7041 DATED 23.7.2015.

EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL
TRANSPORT OFFICER, KARUNAGAPPALLY, DATED 16.6.2017.

EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL
TRANSPORT OFFICER, KARUNAGAPPALLY DAETD 16.6.2017.

EXT.P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 04.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.

EXT.P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM DATED 13.11.2017.

EXT.P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.11.2017 FILED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS
------------------------

NIL

                            //TRUE COPY//

                            P.A.TO JUDGE

ami/



                    ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.
             -----------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C)No.38894 of 2017
             -----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 4th day of December, 2017


                         J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is a permanent employee of the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) working as Grade-II Driver. He has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to conduct an enquiry based on Ext.P9 representation, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. The petitioner has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to reinstate him at Kayamkulam Depot, after considering the aforesaid representation.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the 1st respondent and also the learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 to 4.

3. The Chief Traffic Manager of KSRTC, who is in charge of the Executive Director (Operations), issued Ext.P2 notice dated 5.4.2017, whereby the employees of KSRTC, who own or possess any private stage carriage, contract carriage, tempo W.P.(C)No.38894 of 2017 :-2-:

and trucker parallel service in the district, either in their personal name or in the name of their father, mother, wife, husband etc., have to intimate the same to the concerned officer within a period of 15 days.

4. Pursuant to Ext.P2 notice dated 5.4.2017, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3 reply dated 20.4.2017, stating that his father is having an autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-23/B- 7041 with a valid permit for the period from 29.7.2015 to 28.7.2020. According to the petitioner, subsequent to the submission of Ext.P3 reply, the said autorickshaw was transferred in the name of a third party on 15.6.2017, as evident from Exts.P5 and P6. However, the petitioner was ordered to be transferred from Kayamkulam to Kollam as per Ext.P7 memorandum issued on 4.11.2017. In terms of the said memorandum, the petitioner joined duty at Kollam. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P9 representation before the Chairman and the Managing Director of KSRTC, seeking an order for re-consideration of Exts.P7 and P8.

5. As evident from Ext.P4 certificate of registration of W.P.(C)No.38894 of 2017 :-3-:

autorickshaw bearing registration No.KL-23/B-7041, the said vehicle was owned by the father of the petitioner from 8.6.2015 onwards. The said vehicle was having a valid contract carriage permit, with effect from 29.7.2015, and as evident from Ext.P5, the said permit has been transferred in the name of one Suresh with effect from 13.7.2017, much after the issuance of Ext.P2 notice dated 5.4.2017. Though by Ext.P7 memorandum dated 4.11.2017, the petitioner and others were transferred from their respective Depots for the reason of having private stage carriage operations, the fact that the petitioner's father was having an autorickshaw with contract carriage permit at the time of issuance of Ext.P3 is not in dispute. If that be so, merely for the reason that subsequent to the issuance of Ext.P2 notice, the petitioner's father had transferred the said vehicle to another person is not a valid ground to reconsider the order of transfer in Ext.P7.

6. Since Ext.P9 representation submitted by the petitioner is pending consideration before the 2nd respondent, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the said respondent to W.P.(C)No.38894 of 2017 :-4-:

consider and pass appropriate orders thereon, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, with notice to the petitioner and after affording him an opportunity of being heard.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE ami/4.12.17 //True copy// P.A.to Judge