Kerala High Court
WP(C)/41965/2017 of E. SUKUMARAN 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. 41965 of 2017 (U) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- E. SUKUMARAN, S/O LATE KUNHIKANNAN NAIR, EDATHIL HOUSE, MELMURINGODI
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. 41965 of 2017 (U)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):-------------
E. SUKUMARAN,
S/O LATE KUNHIKANNAN NAIR, EDATHIL HOUSE, MELMURINGODI P.O., THALASSERY.
BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY VADAKARA - 673 101 VADAKARA - 673 101
2. THE SECRETARY
REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VADAKARA- 673 101
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 41965 of 2017 (U) ---------------------------- APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS----------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA VADAKARA DATED19-07-2014 ADJOURNING THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL----------------------- /TRUE COPY/
P. A. TO JUDGE
Pn
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.41965 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.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner's grievance is that his application for regular permit, has not been considered by therespondents in spite of statutory requirement for itsconsideration.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for therespondents.
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that if the petitioner has submitted an application for regularpermit before the respondents, there is no legalimpediment in considering the same in accordance withlaw.
In such circumstances, I direct the respondents to take up the application made by the petitioner anddispose of the same and grant the regular permit asprayed for by him, if there is no legal impediment in doingso, after affording the petitioner an opportunity of being W.P.(c).No.41965 of 2017
: 2 :
heard, within a period of three weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRANJUDGE
sm/