IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24976 of 2010(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- C.ANOOPA, W/O.PRADEEPAN, H.NO.1/533, GEETHA NIVAS, VENGAD P.O., (VIA), ANJARAKKANDY, THALASSERY, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM. BY SR. GOVT.PLEADER SRI. K.C. SURESH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SVS. K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO:24976 OF 2010 V ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th August, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage carriage operator conducting services on the route Kannur – Thrissur with stage carriage vehicle bearing registration No: KL-58/B 8676. According to the petitioner her timings were settled on 4/7/2001. After the settlement of her timings, a large number of new services have been introduced on the route thereby drastically reducing the time gap with which the petitioner had been conducting her services. Consequently frequent clashes with other operators occur. The petitioner has therefore sought revision of her timings so as to enable her to conduct her services smoothly. She complains that no orders have been passed on her request so far. 2. The learned senior Govt. Pleader Mr. K.C.Santhosh Kumar points out that though Ext.P1 is stated to be the request submitted by the petitioner, Ext.P2 does not appear to be a receipt issued with respect to Ext.P1. The above is for the reason that Ext.P1 is dated 15/6/2010 while Ext.P2 refers to a complaint dated 23/6/2010 submitted by the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P2 has been issued in receipt of Ext.P1 and that WPC 24976/2010 2 the difference in dates is due to the fact that Ext.P1 was submitted only on 23/1/2010. In view of the above submission, I feel that Ext.P1 can be directed to be disposed of expeditiously. 3. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to consider the request of the petitioner for the revision of her own timings evidenced herein by Ext.P1, in accordance with law and to pass final orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, provided Ext.P1 has been received and is pending. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 24976/2010 3