K MUSTHAFA Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MALAPPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question that arises for consideration is whether for grant of an application by a stage carriage operator seeking change of halting place coming within the area of sister authority, concurrence of that authority cannot be insisted upon.

(2.) The petitioner holds a regular permit to operate from Kozhikode to Trichur with halting place at Tirur. In Ext. P2 the variation sought for by the petitioner was to change the halting place from Tirur to Trichur and to avoid the trip between Edarikode to Tirur which actually is a deviation from the main route. The primary authority, who is, the first respondent considered the request in its meeting held on 13.6.2000 and decided as follows:

(3.) According to Mr. Gopinathan Nair, counsel who represent the petitioner, no concurrence is required for the grant of Ext. P2 in so far as the curtailment is with regard to the area coming within the jurisdiction of the first respondent itself.