IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 18742 of 2011(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SABITHA.U.C , BAITHUL FATHIMA NEAR GOVINDVILASAM SCHOOL, P.O.ARAKKINAR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,KOZHIKODE 673 001 2. O.N.RAMLATH, W/O.ASSAN KOAY, OLAKKAL NHARAKKATT HOUSE, NADUVATTAM, BEYPORE,KOZHIKODE 673 015. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN FOR R2 SMT.R.PADMAKUMARI FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No. 18742/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE TIME SHEET OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT'S SERVICE EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE PROPOSAL TIMING SUGGESTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5.12.2007 IN MVARP NO.463/2007 EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY DATED 3.12.2010 EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE MVARP NO.68/2011 DATED 7.2.2011 EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF TIMING CONFERENCE DATED 22.6.2011 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE vps P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18742 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage on the route Beypore-Bhat Road-Puthiyappa- Puthiyappa Harbour on the strength of Ext.P1 regular permit. The second respondent is another stage carriage operator operating a stage carriage service on the route Beypore- Puthiyappa-Malikadavu-Gotheswarm. The second respondent applied for variation of the permit. The Regional Transport Authority, Kozhikode that met on 3.12.2010 resolved to grant the variation subject to settlement of timings. This writ petition is filed challenging the said direction in so far as it directs the variation to be granted subject to settlement of timings. 2. The petitioner contends that the timings should be settled only in respect of the extended route and not with respect to the route through which the second respondent was already operating the service. In implementation of Ext.P5 proceedings a timing conference was held on 12.7.2011 and the time schedule was settled. Such being the situation, as a timing WPC No.18742/2011 2 conference has already been held and the time schedule has been settled, the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps