JOSE Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, who are stage carriage operators, have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P2 order dated 11.05.2018 of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam in M.V.A.R.P. No.55/2018, a revision petition filed by the 3 rd respondent herein, who is another stage carriage operator on the route Kulakkattukurissi to Palakkad with stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-09/R-1819, challenging Ext.P1 proceedings of the 2nd respondent, who is the Secretary of the 1st respondent Regional Transport Authority, to the extent of not granting the vacant timings and not reducing the waiting time of his stage carriage bearing registration No.KL-09/R-1819 for more than three hours in the peak time, on the route Muriyankannikadavu?Palakkad. By Ext.P2 order, the Tribunal directed consideration of objection dated 16.08.2017 (Ext.P4 in M.V.A.R.P.No.55/2018) with regard to the revision of the 3 rd respondent's own timings, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order, after hearing all the parties concerned. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 objection made by them against the request of the 3rd respondent for revision of timings, in respect of his service, after affording an opportunity of being heard; and to stay the operation and all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 order.

(2.) On 04.07.2018, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 and 2. Urgent notice by speed post was ordered to the 3rd respondent, returnable within three weeks. This Court granted an interim stay of the operation and all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2 order, for a period of one month. The said interim order, which was extended from time to time, is still in force.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed by the 3 rd respondent, opposing the reliefs sought for in this writ petition.