IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2011 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 14216 of 2011(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- P.T.P.MOIDU, EASTERN HOUSE, KOLACHERY P.O., KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT : ---------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KANNUR-670001 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 14216 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is operating a stage carriage on the route Chervancherry-Payyannur on the strength of a regular permit. The permit was granted after the time schedule was settled recently on 18.11.2010. Shortly thereafter, the petitioner filed Ext.P1 representation dated 21.3.2011 before the respondent requesting for revision of the timings. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent to consider Ext.P1 application for revision of the timings and to pass orders thereon expeditiously. 2. A Division Bench of this Court has in Krishnankutty v. John (1992 (2) KLT 883) held that in the absence of any change in the circumstances after the time schedule was settled, a stage carriage operator cannot seek revision of the timings. The petitioner has no case in Ext.P1 representation that after he commenced the service other stage carriage services were introduced on the route as a result of which there is a clash of timings. The case set out by the petitioner in Ext.P1 is really a grievance about the time schedule allotted to him on 18.11.2010. Such being the situation, the WPC No.14216/2011 2 respondent cannot entertain Ext.P1 and pass orders thereon. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the time schedule fixed on 18.11.2010, his remedy is to challenge the same in other appropriate proceedings. Without prejudice to that right, this writ petition is dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps