High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 06 KL CK 0217

N.P. Ajithkumar, Aiswary House, Asokha Road, Pudukkad P.O., Thrissur and Jayadas vs The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram-676505

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 22 June 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
K. Surendra Mohan, J
CASE NUMBER
WP (C) .No. 13764 of 2012 (U)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 342 words

K. Surendra Mohan, J.—The first petitioner is the registered owner of the stage carriage bearing Registration No. KL-48 D-645 and the 2nd petitioner is the person who has taken possession of the vehicle and operating services on the route Kozhikode-Thrissur- Tirur. Since the route length exceeds 140 Kilometers, the petitioners sought conversion of the service to a fast passenger service. The conversion has been granted. The Regional Transport Authority has also decided that the existing stops should be retained. According to the petitioners, in view of the fact that the existing stops have been retained, there is no need for altering the existing timings of the service. Therefore, the petitioners seek the issue of appropriate directions to implement the decision of the Regional Transport Authority granting conversion of the service of the petitioners as a fast passenger service, without any alteration in the earlier timings.

2.

The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that for the purpose of implementing the decision of the Regional Transport Authority, the petitioners had been directed to produce a fresh set of proposed timings. However, no such timings have been produced. Since the service has been converted to a fast passenger service, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that the timings of the service also require alteration. It is further pointed out that in view of the order of State Transport Authority dated 8.11.2011 also timings are required to be altered. It is to be noticed that the petitioners do not have any right to claim that the timings of the service should not be altered. It is up to the authorities to decide whether an alteration in the timings is necessary or not. I am not satisfied that the decision of the authorities to alter the timings require any interference at the hands of this court. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant any of the reliefs sought for.

If the petitioner complies with the direction to produce a fresh set of proposed timings, the respondents shall take necessary action in the matter expeditiously.