IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 8TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 26101 of 2011(K) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ M. SALIM, SHAHANAZ HOUSE, KANDACHIRA, PERINAD, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 2. SALIM.A., BRAHAMNAZHIKOM, KADAPPAKKADA, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 26101 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE PERMIT AND TIME SHEET OF THE PETITIONER. P2 COPY OF THE TIME SHEET OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT'S SERVICE. P3 COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 13/06/2011 IN WP(C)NO.15789 OF 2011. P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF TIMING CONFERENCE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 01/09/2011. P5 COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 16/09/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO.JUDGE sts P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P (C) No. 26101 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage on the route Thangassery – Perumon on the strength of Ext.P1 permit. The second respondent is another stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage on the route Mukkom - Perumon. The second respondent had filed W.P.(C) No.15789 of 2011 in this Court for an order directing the first respondent herein to pass expeditious orders on the application dated 29.3.2011 filed by him before the first respondent for revision of the time schedule of his stage carriage. By Ext.P3 judgment delivered on 13.6.2011, this Court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent herein to consider the said application and take an appropriate decision thereon, in accordance with law, if it has been received and is pending, expeditiously and in any event within two months after notice to the applicant and other stage carriage operators. Pursuant thereto, a timing conference is scheduled to be held on 1.10.2011 for the purpose of considering that application. This writ petition is filed contending that the application submitted by W.P.(C) No.26101 of 2011 2 the second respondent herein for revision of time schedule is not maintainable for the reason that there has been no change in the circumstances warranting a revision of the timings. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the first respondent to refrain from revising the existing time schedule of the second respondent's stage carriage. 2. In my opinion, this writ petition is misconceived. All that this Court has directed in Ext.P3 judgment is to consider the application filed by the second respondent for revision of the time schedule and to take an appropriate decision thereon in accordance with law, if it has been received and is pending with notice to the applicant and other stage carriage operators. The question whether circumstances warranting revision of time schedule exist or not, is a matter for the authority to decide. Such being the situation, it is for the petitioner to object to the proposed timings raising the contentions which he has raised in this writ petition. I therefore find no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to participate in the timing conference and to W.P.(C) No.26101 of 2011 3 object to the request made by the second respondent for revision of the time schedule. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.26101 of 2011 JUDGMENT Dated:- 30th September, 2011 --------------------------------------