IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6712 of 2008(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- C.P. GIRISH NAMBOODIRI, S/O. PARAMESWARAN NAMBOODIRI, CHERIKKAD MANA, P.O. THOTTIPPAL. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR. 3. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER, K.S.R.T.C., THRISSUR. 4. THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, KSRTC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 6712 OF 2008 Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th February, 2008 J U D G M E N T By Ext. P2, the application for regular permit was rejected by the RTA for reasons of overlapping. When the matter reached the Tribunal, the appellant submitted that objectionable overlapping can be avoided and accepting this request, the order of RTA was set aside and case was remanded for fresh consideration. It is challenging Ext. P6 judgment of the Tribunal this writ petition has been filed. Petitioner submits that a section of objectionable overlapping part is unavoidable. 2. In my view such a contention is not availabale to the petitioner now. Going by Ext. P6 it can be seen that what was argued before the Tribunal was accepted by the Tribunal and on that basis the judgment has been rendered. Thereafter, it is not open to the petitioner now to raise a new plea and seek to get the judgment of the Tribunal invalidated. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-