IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 22ND OCTOBER 2010 / 30TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30101 of 2010(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ KUMARESH, AMMAN NIVAS, PRADHANI, VADAKKENCHERY P.O., PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD- 678 001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/10/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.30101 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated 22nd October, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner was an applicant for the grant of a regular stage carriage permit on the route Kozhippara - Kozhippara. The said application was considered as per Ext.P1 and subsequently a timing conference was convened on 8.7.2010. The contention of the petitioner is that he was asked to operate with a time schedule which would necessitate operation of the service for nearly 14 hours. Contending that settlement of timings in such a manner would violate the provisions under Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 read with Section 2(f) of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961 the petitioner has submitted Ext.P3 representation before the respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that in case timing is settled in respect of the said vehicle in the manner mentioned above, it would also compel the employees to work for more than eight hours and would result in violation of the above mentioned provisions. 2. Essentially, the grievance of the petitioner in respect of the timings is that it would violate the statutory provisions under Section 91 of the Motor Vehicles Act as well as Section 2(f) of the Kerala Transport Workers Act. Raising such grievance the petitioner has already moved WP(C).No.30101/2010 2 the respondent through Ext.P3. The respondent is competent to look into the grievances raised as per Ext.P3 and, in fact, he is duty bound to consider the same. 3. When this Court was about to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 within a time frame the learned Government Pleader brought to my notice a letter issued by the Secretary to the Kerala State Election Commission dated 4.10.2010. A perusal of the said letter No.3947/A/2010/SEC. dated 4.10.2010 would reveal that, as per the same, the Secretary to the Kerala State Election Commission requested rather directed the District Collectors to stop all procedures regarding conducting of R.T.A Board meetings, granting of fresh permits and convening of time conference, till the general election process is over. Taking note of the fact that the said letter was issued by the Secretary to the Election Commission who is not at all empowered to issue such a letter and the fact that it would prevent the authorities under the Kerala Motor Vehicles Act to exercise their quasi judicial function and also with a view to avoid recurrence of such situations this Court directed to serve notice on the standing counsel for the Kerala State Election Commission. 4. When this matter is taken up today, the learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Election Commission submitted that the said WP(C).No.30101/2010 3 letter was withdrawn and a modified letter strictly within the ambit of power under Article 243K and 243ZA has been issued. On perusing the same, I am satisfied that the said letter is perfectly within the jurisdiction of the Election Commission and therefore I do not propose to deal with the matter any further. It is now clear that in view of the said modified order there will not be any impediment for the respondent to consider Ext.P3 representation submitted by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P3 representation submitted by the petitioner and pass orders thereon in accordance with law expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS