IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2011 / 18TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 14303 of 2011(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.PRADEEPKUMAR, MUTHAMPARAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.FEROKE COLLEGE, CALICUT BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOZHIKODE-673020 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C)No.14303/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1. TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 13.9.2007 EXT.P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MVARP 100/2008 DATED 28.5.2008 EXT.P3. TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 16.2.2010 / TRUE COPY / P.S.TO JUDGE P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.14303 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th August, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a stage carriage operator, operating a stage carriage service on the route Balussery – Parappanangadi as a limited stop ordinary service. The running time allotted to the petitioner's stage carriage is 2½ minutes per kilometer. Seeking revision of the time schedule, including reduction of the running time, the petitioner submitted an application before the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode. By Ext.P1 order passed on 13.9.2007 it was rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. By Ext.P2 order passed on 28.5.2008 the State Transport Appellate Tribunal allowed the revision petition, set aside Ext.P1 and remitted the application for re-consideration to the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode. This writ petition is filed contending that though Ext.P2 order has attained finality and more than three years have passed thereafter, till date the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode, has W.P(C).No.14303 of 2011 -:2:- not passed revised orders on the petitioner's application. 2. The respondent has been served and he has entered appearance through the learned Government Pleader. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, Sri.P.M.Manoj, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, submitted that the revision of timings sought by the petitioner involves reduction of the running time and that was the reason why till date orders have not been passed on the petitioner's application. In my opinion such a stand cannot be countenanced in view of the directions issued by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal in Ext.P2 order. By that order the State Transport Appellate Tribunal remitted the petitioner's application to the respondent herein for re-consideration after observing that the petitioner's claim for parity of running time deserves to be considered. The direction issued by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal is binding on the respondent, since he has not chosen to challenge it and it has attained finality. I am therefore, of the opinion that the respondent is bound to re-consider the petitioner's application for revision of running time. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to re-consider the petitioner's application, which W.P(C).No.14303 of 2011 -:3:- was the subject matter of Exts.P1 and P2 orders and take an appropriate decision thereon expeditiously and in any event within one month from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of this judgment before him, after notice to and affording the petitioner and other stage carriage operators, who will be affected by the change of timings sought by the petitioner, an opportunity of being heard. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.14303 of 2011 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 9th August, 2011