IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15237 of 2010(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ V.S.PRADEEP, VAZHAKKATTU HOUSE, PERUMPADAPPU, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE DTO, KSRTC, ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KsS K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15237 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th of June, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a regular stage carriage operator conducting services on the route Aluva-KMP Nagar, Palluruthy with Stage Carriage vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-43/A 8001. The regular permit is valid till 10.11.2012. The petitioner sought for changing the halting place and starting place of the service from Aluva to KMP Nagar. However, the request was rejected by the first respondent on the ground that the variation includes curtailment of the morning trip from Aluva to KMP Nagar which would adversely affect the travelling public. It was also found that the scheme of Nationalisation dated 15.9.2008 prohibited the grant of additional trips. The petitioner challenged the rejection of his application before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal ('STAT' for short). The STAT found that the rejection order was unsustainable and therefore, set aside the same and remanded the matter for being considered afresh after wpc No.13237/2010 2 obtaining a report from the Field Officer. Though the said direction was issued on 30.9.2009, it is the complaint of the petitioner that no orders have been passed thereon till date. The learned Senior Government Pleader has no objection to the matter being directed to be expedited. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner afresh and to pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with the directions of the STAT contained in the judgment dated 30.9.2009 in MVAA No.329 of 2009 and to pass appropriate orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/