IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2008 / 2ND ASHADHA 1930 W.P(C).No. 14509 of 2008(B) ---------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. SMT.ANNAMMA ABRAHAM, MANAGING PARTNER, MAYILVAHANAM MOTORS, SHORNUR-2. 2. K.S.SHINE, KARAYIL HOUSE, P.O.AGALI, MANNARKKAD. 3. SHAJU KORA, PANDIKKATTU HOUSE, KALLAMALA P.O., MANNARKKAD. 4. K.SHAJI, PANDIKKATTIL HOUSE, KALLAMALA P.O., MANNARKKAD. 5. C.L.PATHROSE, CHINGANKULANGARA HOUSE, KARARA P.O., MANNARKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. 2. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD. 3. P.ABDUL RASHEED, PALANKODAN HOUSE, P.O.PANNIYANKURISSY, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNA MENON FOR R3 SRI.M.JITHESH MENON FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: =: 2 := WPC 14509/2008(B) A P P E N D I X PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED IN WPC NO.27794/06 DATED 13/12/2006. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE FOR HEARING AS RELATING TO 3RD RESPONDENT'S SERVICE. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 11.4.2008. 3RD RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(a): TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSED TIMINGS SUGGESTED ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION DATED 30.06.2005. EXT.R3(b): TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 28.10.2005. EXT.R3(c): TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 31.8.2007. EXT.R3(d): TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT FOR THE PERIOD 4.9.2007 TO 3.9.2012. EXT.R3(e): TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 3RD RESPON DENT DATED 5.9.2007. EXT.R3(f): TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 12.03.2008. // T R U E C O P Y // PA TO JUDGE RP/- ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 14509 OF 2008 - B ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2008 J U D G M E N T Ext.P2 notice issued by the 2nd respondent on a request made by the 3rd respondent for revision of his timings is under challenge. It is pointed out that the petitioner has filed his objections before the 2nd respondent objecting to the revision sought for. If that be so, it is for the 2nd respondent to consider that objection as well, when Ext.P2 is taken up for consideration Directing that Ext.P3 objection if received shall also be taken up and considered when Ext.P2 request made by the 3rd respondent is taken up, the writ petition is disposed of. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp