IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2009 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 51 of 2009(S) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30587/2008 Dated 20/10/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.K. CHATTERJI, S/O.KUMARAN, AGED 42 YEARS, THINAYATH HOUSE, POOVATHUSSERI, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- SRI.RENJAN, SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THRISSUR (FATHERS NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ....................... C.O.C.51/2009 ....................... Dated this the 1st day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT I had gone through the affidavit filed by the respondent as directed by this Court. Prima facie I have no reason to disbelieve the averments in paragraph 3 of the affidavit that a timing conference was held on 22.4.2009 and timings of the petitioner's vehicle was settled. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no timing conference was actually convened on 22.4.2009. It may not be possible to undertake an appreciation of this disputed question of fact. I would have normally relegated the petitioner to a remedy that is otherwise available to him in relation to Annexure-R1(d). 2. But at this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that going through the timings which are fixed under Annexure-R1(d), petitioner is called upon to operate the vehicle for 17 hours and he will not be able to get the service of the C.O.C.51/2009 2 employees to work for more that 8 hours. But if the petitioner wants to operate only for 8 hours, respondent may consider re-scheduling the timings in this regard and the timings during which the petitioner is not able to operate, may be treated as a vacancy and so notified. 3. Accordingly, if the petitioner makes a request for revising his timings fixed under Annexure-R1(d) by confining to 8 hours starting from 7.00 am in the morning, such request may be considered on merits and may be boarded before a timing conferences to be convened by the respondent. Subject to the above, Contempt of Court case is closed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs