IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 9227 of 2009(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.J.JOHN, ALUMKAL HOUSE,ANICKAD EAST.P.O.,KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, VATAKARA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY VATAKARA. MR.P.N.SANTHOSH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.9227 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's grievance is regarding Ext.P4. Facts show that by Ext.P1, the primary authority sought concurrence of the respondent, being the sister authority for renewal of the petitioner's permit. That was rejected by Ext.P2. However, by Ext.P3 judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.22043/2007, the respondent was directed to reconsider the matter. It is stated that the respondent, accordingly, reconsidered the matter and by Ext.P4, the matter was adjourned. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition has been filed. 2. As is seen from Ext.P4, the adjournment was on 11/03/2008, and even the records called for, would have been received by now. Taking into account the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to pass final orders on the request made by the primary authority for prior concurrence. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg