IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2008 / 21ST POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 845 of 2008(A) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ M.A.ABDUL KHADER, ISMAIL MANZIL, PITTU PEEDIKA, KODUVAYOOR. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN SRI.HARIKRISHNAN RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. 2. THE SECRETARY, RTA, PALAKKAD. 3. R.MADHUSOODANAN, S/O. A.RAMANKUTTY, MATTUKAD HOUSE, COYALMANNAM, PALAKKAD. R1 & 2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2008 ALONG WITH WPC NO. 865 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 845 & 865 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: January 11, 2008 JUDGMENT The essential dispute in these writ petitions is against the grant of permit to the 3rd respondent. Being rival operators, the question of locus standi in a case like this is concluded against the petitioner in the judgment of a Full Bench of this court in Binu Chacko v. RTA, Pathanamthitta - 2006 (2) KLT 172. Although the petitioner has contended that the question of locus standi is not fully concluded in view of paragraph 28 of the said judgment, I am not impressed by this contention either. In view of this, the writ petitions are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-