IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 R.P.335/2009 IN WA.No. 598 of 2007 (E) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.A.NO.598 OF 2007 DATED 22.1.2009. .................... REVIEW PETITIOER /APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C) --------------------------------------------------- U.D.SHAYI, SHEENA NIVAS, P.O.PATHAYAKUNNU, POOKODE, THALASSERY, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.P.P.BALAMOHANA BABU, RATHIN NIVAS, P.O.PALAYAD. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS IN WP(C) ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. K.KARUNAKARAN, S/O.KUNHAMBU, KOKKADAN HOUSE, PARASSINIKKADVU, KASARAGOD DT. 2. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KSRTC BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER BASANT BALAJI. THIS R.P.IN WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2009, ALONG WITH W.A.NO.1238/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK J.B. Koshy,Ag.C.J. & V. Giri, J. ---------------------------------------- W.A. No. 598 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2009 Judgment Koshy, Ag.C.J. This writ appeal is filed against the order in R.P. as well as the judgment in W.P. © No.1675 of 2006. Originally, the above writ petition was disposed of without noticing that permit was already granted. Therefore, the original judgment was set aside by the order in R.P. and it was posted for re-hearing. Thereafter, the judgment was delivered on merit. The Regional Transport Authority ratified the decision of the Secretary in granting permit, but since time schedule was not settled, it was not issued. The learned Judge directed to issue permit after settling the timings in a timing conference within two months from the date of production of the copy provided the petitioner satisfies the other requirements like production of current records etc. It is also further provided that if any party is aggrieved, he can challenge it. There is a statutory remedy of appeal against the orders passed by the R.T.A. and, W.A. No.598/2007 2 therefore, we see no ground to interfere in the judgment. Appeal is dismissed. J.B.Koshy Acting Chief Justice V. Giri Judge vaa