High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 08 KL CK 0039

Shajikuttan D. vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kollam, Pin 691506

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 4 August 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Devan Ramachandran, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (C) Nos.17530, 8338 Of 2023

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

13 paragraphs · 642 words

Devan Ramachandran, J

1.

Among the afore two writ petitions, W.P.(C).No.17530/2023 has been filed by the petitioner - Sri.Shajikuttan D., seeking a direction to the respondent to effect the transfer of ownership of the vehicle, bearing No.KL 07 AU 9176, in his favour and to issue him a regular permit as per Ext.P2 decision produced therein, with respect to the same at the earliest. He says that the afore vehicle has already been blacklisted by the respondent and that it is illegal and unlawful. He thus seeks a direction that the settlement of the timing of the service be ordered to be done as per law.

2.

While so, W.P.(C).No.8338/2023 has been filed by the petitioners therein, virtually opposing the afore request of Sri.Shajikuttan D., saying that they have preferred Exts.P5 and P6 objections.

3.

Sri.O.D.Sivadas  –  learned  counsel  for the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.17530/2023, explained that, even though a timing conference was scheduled earlier - as evident from Ext.P5 - it has been adjourned sine die, without any decision being taken on 29.07.2023; but that, in the meanwhile, Ext.P7 has been issued scheduling a Timing Conference on 05.08.2023. He, therefore, prays that all action pursuant to Ext.P7 be ordered to be deferred, until such time as his client’s application, reflected in Ext.P5, is considered.

4.

Smt.Parvathy Kottol – learned Government Pleader, submitted that the attempt of the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.17530/2023 appears to be to stall the Timing Conference as ordered in Ext.P7; and that it is impermissible because his application, as referred to in Ext.P5, was found to be incomplete, for want of proper address. She affirmed that the objections to his application, at the instance of the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.8338/2023, are also pending.

5.

Sri.Prasad Chandran – learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C).No.8338/2023, submitted that his clients have been constrained to approach this Court, because the objections preferred against the application of the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.17530/2023 has not been considered; and added that the specific contention of his clients is also that the address furnished by him is fake or fraudulent.

6.

When I evaluate and consider the afore rival submissions, it is luculent that the primary concern of the petitioner in W.P.(C).No. 17530/2023 is that the Timing Conference as ordered in Ext.P7, will take certain decisions and that this would be prejudicial to his application, which is reflected in Ext.P5.

7.

That said, it is without doubt that, whenever the application of the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.17530/2023 is taken up, the objections preferred by the petitioners in the other writ petition will certainly have to be considered and evaluated by the competent Authority.

8.

Therefore, in order to balance the interests of all sides, including those persons whose applications are reflected in Ext.P7, I am of the firm view that, along with the Timing Conference mentioned in the latter, the petitioner’s application should also be considered and disposed of.

9.

In  fact,  the  learned  Government  Pleader –  Smt.Parvathy  Kottol,  submitted  that,  if  this Court clarifies that the petitioner’s application should be considered in the Timing Conference scheduled as per Ext.P7, she would not stand in the way, provided liberty is left with the Authorities to decide it in terms of law, after verifying that all the relevant and germane requirements have been complied with.

In the afore circumstances, I order these writ petitions in the following manner:

(a) W.P.(C).No.17530/2023 is ordered, directing the respondent to schedule the Timing Conference with respect to the petitioner, which is reflected as item No.1 in Ext.P5, along with the Timing Conference in Ext.P7.

(b) W.P.(C).No.8338/2023 is allowed, directing the 2nd respondent therein to take up Exts.P5 and P6 representations of the petitioners and treat them as objections to the application made by the petitioner in W.P. (C).No. 17530/2023 and dispose it of, when the Timing Conference is held in terms of the directions above.