IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 22ND MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 795 of 2008(T) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- HARIHARAN M.P., S/O THALASSERAN, MELEPURAKKAL HOUSE, CHERUKUNNU, OTHUKKUNGAL P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J.VALLYARA. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SABU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/02/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.795/2008-T: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT : EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE R.T.A., MALAPPURAM HELD ON 23/09/2006 VIDE ITEM NO. 98. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 795 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: February 11, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner submits that by Ext.P1 variation of regular permit was granted subject to settlement of timings. It is complaining of delay in convening timing conference and issue the varied permit, this petition has been filed. 2. On instructions the learned Government Pleader tells me that there are large number of cases pending and that the respondents are following priority to consider the requests, such as the one made by the petitioner. It is also submitted that going by the priority, the petitioner's turn will come only on 2.7.2008. 3. Having regard to the fact that the respondents are following the priority, I feel that the priority should be strictly followed. It will not be proper for this court to direct that the priority should not be followed in favour of a person who approached this court and such WP(C) 795/08 Page numbers an order will only add to the confusion that is already prevailing. Therefore, recording the submission made by the Government Pleader, I close this writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-