IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2008 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15522 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ P.A.MATHEW, PUTHANKALAYIL, ERAVIMANGALAM MUTTUCHIRA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, KOTTAYAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. SECRETARY, RTA, KOTTAYAM 3. K.M.THOMAS, KOORUMULLUMTHADATHIL, KANAKKADI, ETTUMANOOR. 4. P.V.CHACKO, PULLATHIL HOUSE, THELLAKAM PO, KOTTAYAM 5. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. R1, 2 & 5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI K.V.MANOJKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 15522 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: MAY 29, 2008 JUDGMENT Ext.P2 proceedings of the 1st respondent settling timing in respect of stage carriage KL-6/A 3753 was challenged in revision before the STAT by filing Ext.P4. That was rejected confirming Ext.P2 by Ext.P6. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P2 as confirmed in appeal. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though it is stated in Ext.P2 that timing conference was held, such a conference was, in fact, not held and the statement in Ext.P2 to the contrary is factually wrong. A reading of Ext.P6 order in revision rendered by the Tribunal shows that such a contention was not raised before the Tribunal. In the absence of which, I am not inclined to consider this plea or the plea that the Tribunal ought to have verified the records to ascertain the correctness of WP(C) 15522/08 2 this contention. 3. I do not find any circumstance warranting interference with the impugned orders. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-