IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2010 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 19201 of 2007(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M.S. ANANDAN, S/O.SUKUMARAN, AGED 58 YEARS, MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHIRAYAM, PANAIKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 19201/2007-J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA, ERNAKULAM DATD 15/03/2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL IN MVAA NO.214/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE SRO NO.278/1993 DATED 15/02/1993. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/04/2007 IN MVAA NO.214/2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE RTA, ERNAKULAM DATED 17/05/2007. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.19201 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Contrasting Exts.P1 and P4, and P5, there is no doubt that Ext.P5 order has been issued by the Regional Transport Authority in violation of the directions and findings in Ext.P4 appellate order of the STAT. The STAT had specifically held in Ext.P4 that Kongorpilly-Tripunithura-North Parur-Kakkanadu is not a city route but moffussil route and the notification relied on by the RTA would apply only to city routes. It was accordingly that Ext.P1 rejection order was found to be unsustainable. Obviously therefore, it is inappropriate for the RTA to get over Ext.P4 appellate order of the STAT. Ext.P5, being an order passed in clear affront to the findings in Ext.P4, does not stand. Accordingly, Ext.P5 is quashed and the RTA is directed to re- consider the application of the petitioner strictly in terms of the findings in Ext.P4. The writ petition is allowed accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.24/03.