SUSHAMMA Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Objectionable overlapping over a notified route; is the issue raised in the writ petition. The petitioner herein applied for a regular permit to operate on the route Chathanad-North Parur-Munambam. The Regional Transport Authority (for brevity "RTA") called for reports from the Field Officer, twice, which are produced as Exhibits P1 and P2. In both the reports though overlapping was noticed in the notified routes Aluva-Chathanad and Aluva-Cherai; such overlapping was found to be not objectionable, since the same came within an exception clause. Despite such reports, the RTA declined grant of permit on the reasoning that the proposed route touches two intermediate points of the notified routes. The essential dispute to be resolved in the above case is as to whether the "intermediate points" referred to in Schedule-I can be equated to the "intermediate places" as indicated in Annexure-A to the approved scheme, produced as Exhibit P5.

(2.) The petitioner had filed a revision before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (for brevity "the Tribunal"), who has disposed of the same, directing reconsideration by the RTA after notice to the Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for brevity "KSRTC"). The petitioner is aggrieved insofar as the Tribunal has noticed that the petitioner, who was the revision petitioner before the Tribunal, had expressed an intention to make a modified proposal, on the strength of which the matter was remanded. The petitioner seeks consideration of his contentions, since he would be tied down by the so termed undertaking; which he refutes to have made.

(3.) The petitioner would contend that, in fact there is no objectionable overlapping, as has been specifically reported by the Field Officer in Exhibits P1 and P2. The petitioner would also contend that the route, admittedly does not pass through the two intermediate places specified in Annexure-A of Exhibit P5 scheme. The intermediate places as specified in Annexure-A of the route Aluva-Cherai are U.C.College, Thattampady, Mannam and Parur and in respect of the route Aluva-Chathanad are U.C.College, Thattampady, Mannam, Parur, Kadamamgalam Temple Junction. The proposed route of the petitioner, but for touching Parur, which is an intermediate place in both the notified routes, does not touch on any of the other places specified therein. Hence, looking at Schedule-I, which notified the "routes as indicated in Annexure-A and all routes connecting two intermediate points of such routes", it is the contention that the "intermediate points" referred to in Schedule-I are the "intermediate places" in Annexure-A. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on K.S.R.T.C. v. R.T.A., Kollam, 2005 2 KerLT 217 , judgments in W.A.No.1627 of 2013 dated 04.03.2014, O.P.No.3790 of 1974 and connected cases dated 13.12.1974, W.P.(C).No.23824 of 2003 dated 18.03.2004 and W.A.No.1058 & 1059 of 2004 dated 22.03.2006.