IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WA.No. 1244 of 2008 ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.16240/2008 Dated 30/05/2008 .................... APPELLANT / PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- VINOD AGED 38 S/O JANARDHANAN PILLAI CHEMPAKASSERIL KANDIYOOR MAVELIKARA BY ADV. SRI.R.PADMAKUMAR SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR TRANSORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. ASSISTANT TRANSPORT OFFICER K.S.R.T.C. KARUNAGAPPALLY BY SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, KSRTC THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L. DATTU, C.J. & A.K. BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 1244 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008 Judgment H.L. Dattu, C. J: In the writ petition filed, petitioner had called in question Ext.P7 notice issued by the respondent authority. By the impugned notice, the respondents have directed the petitioner to vacate the old paid urinal at the KSRTC bus stand. 2. The learned single Judge has disposed of the writ petition by his order dated 30th of May 2008 solely on the ground that for the very same relief sought for in the writ petition, petitioner has filed O.S.166/2008 and the same is pending before a learned Munsiff at Karunagappally. 3. In the appeal, the learned counsel Sri.Pradeep appearing for the appellant contends that when the matter was decided by the learned single Judge, no suit was pending and as such there were no parallel proceedings. If that be so, the petitioner ought to have brought to the notice of the learned single Judge about the withdrawal of the suit. The learned single Judge in fact while disposing of the writ petition has only observed that parallel proceedings are impermissible. If for any reason the suit was not pending as on the date of disposal of the writ petition, the same should have been brought to the notice of the learned single Judge. In that view of the matter we decline to interfere. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU Chief Justice A.K. BASHEER Judge an.