IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 31ST MAY 2011 / 10TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14562 of 2011(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.KRISHNADAS, KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, NEDUNGOTTUR, SHORNUR. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR-680 001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.14562 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st May, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage service on the route Mayannur - Pazhayannur on the strength of a regular permit. When the Mayannur bridge was opened in January 2011 thereby providing easy and convenient access to the neighbouring town of Ottapalam the petitioner sought a variation of the permit by extending the service from Mayannur to Ottapalam along the newly constructed bridge. The Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur that met on 25.2.2011 considered the application and resolved to grant the variation and directed the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur to issue a time schedule for the extended portion on a provisional basis and thereafter settle the timings if objections are received from existing stage carriage operators. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though such a direction was issued more than three months back, till date the variation has not been endorsed on the original of the permit. In this writ petition the W.P(C) NO.14562/2011 -:2:- petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to issue a set of provisional timings as directed in Ext.P1 and to endorse the variation on the original of the permit. Relying on Exts.P3 and P4 judgments of this Court it is contended that the direction issued by the Regional Transport Authority to issue a set of provisional timings and thereafter to settle the timings if objections are received from any quarter is a lawful procedure and therefore there is no reason why the respondent should not act as directed in Ext.P1. 2. Sri.Basant Balaji, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that as the extension of the service is along a newly opened bridge and the route is not adequately served, the respondent will issue a set of provisional timings and thereafter finalise the timings if objections are received from any quarter. In the light of the said submission, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions: The respondent shall, within one week from the date on which the petitioner produces a copy of this judgment before him, issue a set of timings to the petitioner on a provisional basis and shall immediately thereafter endorse the variation on the original of the permit. The respondent shall thereafter invite objections W.P(C) NO.14562/2011 -:3:- from other stage carriage operators and settle the timings within a period of three months. If any existing stage carriage operator is aggrieved by the time schedule issued to the petitioner pursuant to the directions in this judgment, it will be open to him or her to object to the timings and to request the respondent to convene a timing conference to settle the timings expeditiously. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.14562 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 31st May, 2011