IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2011 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5586 of 2011(W) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.R.JOY, MENACHERY HOUSE, NAYATHODE P.O., ANKAMALY. BY ADV. SRI.P.DEEPAK RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BASANT BALAJI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 5586 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner applied for a fresh regular stage carriage permit to operate a stage carriage on the route Mulamkuzhy – Marampilly Bridge via Illithode, Kadappana, Adivaram, Malayattur church, Sebiyoor Church, Mundangamattom, Kalady, Kanjoor, Kaipra, Sreebhoothapuram and Thiruvairanikulam along the recently opened Sreemoolam bridge. The Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam that met on 20.12.2010 resolved to grant the permit subject to settlement of timings. Ext.P1 proceedings issued by the Regional Transport Authority in that regard discloses that the route does not overlap any nationalised route and that the service is to an area which is not adequately served. The grievance voiced by the petitioner is that though nearly two months have passed after the Regional Transport Authority granted the permit, till date, the permit has not been issued for the reason that the time schedule has not been fixed. In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent to settle the timings and issue the permit in implementation of Ext.P3 order within a time limit to be fixed by this Court. W.P.(C) No.5586 of 2011 2 2. Ext.P4 letter sent by the President of the Sreemoolanagaram Grama Panchayat to the Regional Transport Officer, Ernakulam discloses that the route in respect of which the Regional Transport Authority has granted the permit operates through a bridge which was inaugurated on 15.1.2011. Therefore, it is evident that a portion of the route is a virgin route. Ext.P4 letter also discloses that there is inadequacy of private stage carriages in that locality. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that the respondent should provisionally settle the timings and issue a permit to the petitioner subject to revision, if any objection is received from the other operators to the said time schedule. I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent to issue the permit in implementation of Ext.P3 order with a set of provisional timings. Needful in the matter shall be done expeditiously and in any event within one week from the date on which the petitioner produces a certified copy of the judgment before the respondent. If, after the permit is issued and the petitioner commences service, any other person(s) objects to the timings presently fixed, it will be open to the respondent to convene a timing conference and settle the timings with notice to the petitioner and W.P.(C) No.5586 of 2011 3 the other operators operating on the route or sectors thereof. In that event, the time schedule shall be settled expeditiously and in any event within two months from the date on which any objection is received from the existing operators to the time schedule presently fixed. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.