Kerala High Court
WP(C)/42011/2017 of SUBRAHMANIAN .V. Vs THE SECRETARY 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. 42011 of 2017 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------- SUBRAHMANIAN .V., S/O. KUNHUKUTTAN, VALAYANGADI HOUSE, EAST PANDIKKAD,
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. 42011 of 2017 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):------------- SUBRAHMANIAN .V.,S/O. KUNHUKUTTAN, VALAYANGADI HOUSE,EAST PANDIKKAD, KOLAPARAMBA P.O.,MANJERI VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
THE SECRETARY,REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.M. MANOJ
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. 42011 of 2017 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:---------------------- APPENDIX=========
EXT.P1: PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 07.09.2017 SUBMITTED BYTHE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL---------------------- //TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
DST
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.42011 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
The petitioner's grievance is that his application for revision of timings, namely Exhibit P1, has not beenconsidered by the respondent in spite of statutoryrequirement for its consideration.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for therespondent.
3. The learned Government Pleader submits that if the petitioner has submitted Exhibit P1 application forrevision of timings before the respondent, there is no legalimpediment in considering the same in accordance withlaw.
In such circumstances, I direct the respondent totake up Exhibit P1 application made by the petitioner anddispose of the same and grant revised timings as prayed W.P.(C) NO.42011/ 2017 2
for by him, if there is no legal impediment in doing so,after affording the petitioner an opportunity of beingheard, within a period of three weeks from the date ofreceipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly Sd/-DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
IAP