IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2010 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 32780 of 2010(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.P.VIJAYAN, S/O. PARAN, KARUMAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUTHUVARA, P.O.PUZHAKKAL, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNA MENON SRI.M.JITHESH MENON RESPONDENT: --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM-676505. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2010, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 33161 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)Nos.32780 & 33161 of 2010 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner in the former writ petition is an existing stage carriage operator on the route Kodungalloor-Kuttipuram with stage carriage bearing No.KL-8/AP.7182 and the petitioner in the latter writ petition is an existing stage carriage operator with stage carriage bearing KL-8 X 5533 on the route Thrissur-Guruvayur-Kodungallur-Kottappuram. The grievance of the petitioners is that on receipt of the application of one Mr.Mohan Kumar who is an existing operator on the route Thrissur-Kozhikode-Guruvayoor with stage carriage bearing KL 8/AN 4797 timings were settled without notice to them though they are also interested operators on the route as all of them are having a common sector for operation. According to the petitioners in both these writ petitions though a hearing was held as early as on 30/9/2010 in the matter of settlement of timings in respect of the stage carriage with registration No.KL-8 AN 4797 belonging to the said Mohan Kumar they were not put on notice. A statement has been filed by the respondents in W.P. W.P.(C)Nos.32780 & 33161/2010 : 2 : (C)No.33161 of 2010. It is stated therein that notice with respect to the time conference under the provisions of terms 212 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules has been put on the notice board and was also served on all interested operators on the route. However, the writ petitioners refuted the same and their consistent case is that at no point of time notice with respect to the settlement of the timings in respect of aforesaid stage carriage belonging to the said Mohan Kumar was published. That apart, it is contended that even after the time conference on 30/9/2010, no order was passed on that day or immediately thereafter. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in these writ petitions and also the learned Government Pleader. The learned Government Pleader made available a copy of order passed by the first respondent, Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram viz., order No.C5/1999/2010 dated 30/9/2010. A perusal of the same would undoubtedly reveal that though it is dated 30/9/2010 the order was signed only on 28/10/2010. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the copy of the said order W.P.(C)Nos.32780 & 33161/2010 : 3 : was also not communicated to them and in fact, they did not have any knowledge about the same before-hand. There is nothing on record to show that the said order has been communicated to the concerned parties including the petitioners. 3. In case an existing stage carriage operator on a particular route is aggrieved by the timings settled in respect of another carriage a statutory remedy is available under the Motor Vehicles Act to redress the same. I am of the view that the petitioners in these writ petitions have to resort to the statutory remedy available under the Motor Vehicles Act. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are yet to receive copies of the order furnished today before this Court by the Government Pleader. In view of the rival contentions raised, these writ petitions are disposed as hereunder:- The respondents shall communicate copies of the order No.C5/1999/2010 dated 30/9/2010 to the petitioners in these writ petitions expeditiously at any rate within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It W.P.(C)Nos.32780 & 33161/2010 : 4 : will be open to the petitioners to challenge the said order in case they are aggrieved by the same, in accordance with the provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act, on its receipt. These writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE skj