BADUVAN KUNHI Vs. K.M.ABDULLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is by a person who is not a party to the writ petition; his grievance is that the first respondent filed a writ petition behind his back and obtained a judgment to the appellant's prejudice. His complaint confounds the first respondent's conduct for he filed his previous writ petition on the issue arraying the appellant as a party. Facts As Set Out By The Appellant:

(2.) The appellant is the registered owner of stage carriage with registration No. KL -13/K -5986. The vehicle has a regular permit to operate on the route Mundathaduka -Kasaragod. Initially, the 1st respondent was issued with a temporary permit for his vehicle No. KL -13/J -7585 to operate on the route Mundathaduka - Kasaragod -Kambar (Via), Neerchal, B.C Road Civil Station. The permit, given in the vacancy of another stage carriage, had the permit valid up to 18.12.2015.

(3.) The appellant has a grievance that the first respondent's route permit stretches 3 km., into the appellant's permitted route, its total stretch being 28 km. The appellant submitted an objection before the RTA authorities: The permissible overlapping is 5% of the total route length; it comes to 1.4 km. But the first respondent's route overlaps by over 5% - -to be precise by 3 km. The authorities, therefore, should not renew the temporary permit to the first respondent. The appellant, after complaining, filed W.P.(C) No. 37837/2015 seeking a direction to the authorities to consider his objections.