IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2011 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 3156 of 2011(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KURIAN VARGHESE, CHENNATTUMATTOM, KATTAPPANA. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.GOPINATHAN NAIR SMT.G.CHITRA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, IDUKKI, PIN - 685 602. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.3156/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 18.1.2010 EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE S.T.A.T., ERNAKULAM IN MVARP NO.112/2010 DATED 1.10.2010 / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.3156 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage operator operating a stage carriage on the route Ernakulam South – Kumali as a limited stop ordinary service. The petitioner is presently operating the service with a running time of two minutes per kilometer from Ernakulam South to Neriyamangalam and 2.25 minutes per Kilometer from Neriyamangalam to Kumaly. He had applied for parity in running time and consequent re-settlement of timings by submitting Ext.P1 application in that regard before the respondent. In that application he had requested that the running time may be fixed as 2 minutes per kilometer in parity with other stage carriage operators. By order passed on 7.5.2010 the said application was rejected. The petitioner thereupon filed a revision petition before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. By Ext.P2 order passed on 1.10.2010 the State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowed the revision petition, set aside the order rejecting Ext.P1 and remitted it back to the respondent for fresh consideration. This writ W.P(C) NO.3156/2011 -:2:- petition is filed contending that though more than four months have passed thereafter till date revised orders have not been passed on Ext.P1. In this writ petition the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to pass revised orders on Ext.P1 application pursuant to Ext.P2 order of remand passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. 2. Heard Sri.K.V.Gopinathan Nair, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.P.M.Manoj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent. It is evident from a reading of Ext.P2 that the State Transport Appellate Tribunal has directed the respondent to reconsider Ext.P1 application wherein the petitioner had sought parity of running timing with other operators and consequent revision of timings. Ext.P1 application was filed on 18.1.2010 and it was initially rejected on 7.5.2010. By Ext.P2 order passed on 1.10.2010 the said order was set aside and the respondent was directed to reconsider the application. More than four months have passed thereafter. In such circumstances I am of the opinion that the respondent should take up Ext.P1 and pass appropriate orders thereon expeditiously. W.P(C) NO.3156/2011 -:3:- I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to take up Ext.P1 and pass revised orders thereon expeditiously and in any event within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after affording the petitioner and the other stage carriage operators, who would be affected by the outcome of Ext.P1, an opportunity of being heard. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.3156 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 18th March, 2011