AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
C.S Dias, J
The writ petition is filed to direct the respondent to consider and dispose of Ext P2 request made by the petitioner.
The petitioner’s case is that, she is the owner of stage carriage vehicles bearing registration No.KL 3/BE 6084 and KL 02/AF 2599. This Court by Ext P1 judgment had directed the respondent to consider the requests made by the petitioner and dispose of the same after hearing all the affected parties. Pursuant to Ext P1 judgment, the respondent had convened a timing conference on 28.12.2022. But the same could not be finalised due to objections of the rival operators. The entry of the operators need to be restricted by the respondent so as to conduct the timing in a peaceful manner. Hence, the petitioner submitted Ext P2 application before the said Officer. Hence, the writ petition.
Heard; Sri.O.D Sivadas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
On a consideration of the pleadings and materials on record, I find that this Court has already by Ext P1 judgment directed the respondent to consider the requests made by the petitioner after hearing all interested/affected operators and then take a decision on the same.
In the light of the above direction passed by this Court, I do not think that the respondent can be permitted to curtail the rights of the affected persons. Thus, I am of the view that the writ petition is unsustainable in law.
Resultantly, the writ petition is dismissed.