IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2009 / 23RD SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 18206 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE QUILON DISTRICT MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKER'S CO-OPERATIVE SOCIIETY LTD.NO.Q 420, RAMANKULANGARA, KAVANAD P.O., KOLLAM-691 003, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL SIVARAMAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM. 2. RAJAMMA MATHUNNI PANICKER, PUTHEN VILA VEEDU, KUNDARA, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN FOR R2 GP SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).18206/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner, a Co-operative Society, operates a regular stage carriage on the route Kollam – Anchal. Apparently, the said permit was granted in the year 1989. In 2006, permission was granted in favour of the 2nd respondent to operate on the route Elavaramkuzhi – Kollam. It seems that the timings in relation to the 2nd respondent was settled on 18.8.2006. 2nd respondent, according to the petitioner, has sought for a revision of timings. This is being objected to by the petitioner as per Ext.P1. This writ petition was filed with an apprehension that the objections in Ext.P1 may not be considered in the course of considering the application for revision of timings submitted by the 2nd respondent. 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit contending that the objections raised by the petitioner is misconceived. The revision of timings is sought only in respect of one particular timing. Be that as it may, objections filed by the petitioner as Ext.P1 shall also be considered in the course of W.P.(C).18206/09 2 taking a decision on the 2nd respondent's application for revision of her own timings. Writ petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs