IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 26TH JUNE 2008 / 5TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 16554 of 2008(U) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SMT.M.T.KHADEEJA, W/O.MOIDEEN, MACHINGALTHODI HOUSE, AMBALAVATTOM, PANAMANNA, OTTAPPALAM. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.V. MANOJKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.16554/2008 U APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE REGULAR PERMIT APPLICATION DTD. 31/07/2006. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE TIME SCHEDULE TO EXT.P1. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SKETCH TO EXT.P1. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 21/08/2006. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN MVAA NO. 49/2008 DTD. 30/11/2007. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN MVAA NO.49/08 DTD. 30/01/2008. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE MVI REPORT DTD. 7/08/2006. EXT.P8; COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 23/04/2008. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.11845/08 DTD. 27TH MAY 2008. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 16554 OF 2008 U = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 26th June 2008 J U D G M E N T The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext. P8 proceedings of the RTA, imposing conditions while granting a permit to the petitioner. 2. Facts of the case are that the petitioner submitted an application for a regular permit on the route Ottapalam-Poothakkad with two trips to Poothakkad. Ext. P2 is the time schedule proposed which shows the trips as above. However, her application was rejected by the RTA by Ext. P4 proceedings. 3. Against Ext. P4, petitioner filed Ext. P5 appeal to the Tribunal which disposed of the appeal by Ext. P6 judgment. The Tribunal allowed the appeal setting aside Ext. P4 order, and directed the RTA to grant regular permit applied for by the petitioner subject to settlement of timings. In pursuance to Ext. P6 the matter was reconsidered by the RTA. By Ext. P8, the RTA granted permit, but however, subject to the condition that all trips should be made to W.P.(C) No. 16554 OF 2008 -2- Poothakkad. It is challenging this condition the writ petition has been filed. 4. As already noticed, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner and directed grant of permit as applied for, subject to settlement of timing. Once the Tribunal has directed the grant as above, all that remains to be done by the RTA is the ministerial act of granting permit as applied for by the petitioner. It is seen from Ext. P8 that by imposing the condition as above, a departure has been made. Therefore, Ext. P8 to the extent it requires the permit holder to make all the trips to Poothakkad is beyond the scope of Ext. P6 and for that reason it is liable to be set aside. 5. Accordingly the condition in Ext. P8 requiring the petitioner to make all the trips to Poothakkad will stand set aside. It is directed that in pursuance to Ext. P8, the 2nd respondent shall convene a timing conference and issue the permit as applied for by the petitioner as per Ext. P1 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-