KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT Vs. N R BABUDAS, S/O RAMAN NAIR; STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL; REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY; SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Kerala State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'K.S.R.T.C.') is the appellantin all these cases. W.A.No.1270/2009 is treated as the main case for the purpose of referring to exhibits and parties. The 1st respondent applied for a temporary permit on the route Vattappara- Ernakulam-Kaloor via Peppathy, Mulanthuruthy, Chottanikkara, Thiruvankulam, Thripunithura, Vyttila and Kaloor Kadavanthra road. It is submitted that he was operating on the route for quite some time. But, when he applied for re-issue of the temporary permit, taking into account the objection raised by the K.S.R.T.C., the application for temporary permit was rejected by Regional Transport Authority, Ernakulam, by issuing Ext.P5 decision dated 19.7.2008. The said order reads as follows:

(2.) 1st respondent challenged Ext.P5 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal. The STAT dismissed the appeal by Ext.P9 judgment dated 10.9.2008. Challenging Exts.P5 and P9, the Writ Petition was filed. The K.S.R.T.C filed a counter affidavit resisting the prayers in the Writ Petition. But, the learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, allowed the Writ Petition. Hence, this appeal by the K.S.R.T.C.

(3.) We heard the learned counsel on both sides. The learned standing counsel for the K.S.R.T.C. submitted that they are mainly pressing only point No.(ii) mentioned in Ext.P5 for rejection of the permit. Ernakulam- Muvattupuzha is a nationalised route covered by Annexure-B nationalisation scheme. Ernakulam - Muvattupuzha is the 1st route mentioned in Annexure-A of the said scheme. Tripunithura, Thiruvankulam, Puthencruz and Valagom are the intermediate points. The K.S.R.T.C. is operating several services on that route. Therefore, the private operators cannot get any permit touching Ernakulam- Muvattupuzha route, except in accordance with the scheme. The scheme provides that private operators cannot operate on any route, connecting or passing through two intermediate points. The route Vattapara-Ernakula-Kaloor touches Thiruvankulam and Tripunithura,which are two intermediate points on Ernakulam Muvattupuzha nationalised route. Therefore, the point No.(ii) mentioned in Ext.P5 for rejecting the application was legal and valid. There was no reason to interfere with the same, it is submitted by the learned standing counsel. The learned counsel for the party respondents supported the view taken by the learned Single Judge.