Kerala High Court
WP(C)/42138/2017 of RATHEESH.N.A Vs THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY on 29 December 2017
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 42138 of 2017 (N) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- RATHEESH.N.A, S/O. ACHUTHAN, NADODY HOUSE, VALARKAVU, KURIACHIRA P.O.,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 42138 of 2017 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):-------------
RATHEESH.N.A,
S/O. ACHUTHAN, NADODY HOUSE, VALARKAVU, KURIACHIRA P.O.,THRISSUR.
BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
2THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.3THRISSUR CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,THRISSUR, PIN-680 001.
R3 BY ADV. SRI. SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL, SC, BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. A.C. VIDHYA
THRISSUR CORPORATION
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 42138 of 2017 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:---------------------- APPENDIX=========
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL---------------------- //TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
DST
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.42138 OF 2017
----------------------------------
Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
I see that issues similar to those raised in this writpetition have already been considered by another learnedSingle Judge which has culminated in a judgment reported as Rajesh v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority (2014(3) KLT 341). I am in respectful confirmation ofthe directions contained therein. I therefore see noreason to deviate there from.
2. I see that the petitioner is a contract carriagepermit holder of autorickshaw. He say that he hasobtained orders from the State Appellate TransportTribunal for varying the said permit. He has filed this writpetition seeking directions to the respondents to receivethe fee for application for variation of the permit and alsofor a direction that he be issued the permit in terms of theorders of the State Appellate Transport Tribunal.
3. In view of the judgment above referred I dispose of W.P.(C) NO.42138/ 2017 2
this writ petition also directing the respondents to issuepermit of the petitioner as applied for him in conformitywith the judgment of the State Appellate TransportTribunal, Ernakulam, within a period of one month fromthe date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
IAP