Mijo and others v. Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur and others
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- Dev an Ramachandran
- Judgment Date
- 2017-12-29
- Court Decision / Holding
- The court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondents to issue the petitioners’ permits as applied for, in conformity with the SAT judgment, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the judgment.
- Final Disposition
- Petition disposed with directions to issue permits as per SAT judgment within one month of certified copy; fee-related aspects to be handled per SAT and statutory provisions as applicable to permit variations.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Mijo, Chithalan House, Anchery P.O., Thrissur
- Biju N.J., Nellankara House, Ayyanthole, Thrissur
- Dijo T.J., Thalakkottukara House, Laloor, Thrissur
- Suresh, Kunnambath House, Ayyappankavu P.O., Thrissur
- Viju Kannam PUzha House, Kuriachira P.O., Thrissur
- Babu T.D., Thekkkananth House, Mulavam, Thrissur
- Shiny, Kuttichira House, Poothole, Thrissur
- Greeshma, Kaipully House, Vi yyur, Thrissur
- Ravi V.K., Vellamparambil House, Anchery P.O., Thrissur
- Shibu, Puthusssery House, Ollur, Thrissur
- Pratheesh, Thailadan House, Elamthuruthy, Thrissur
- Vibish, Mang alath House, Chiyyaram, Thrissur
- Lijo George Pallakkara House, Ollur, Thrissur
- Sebin Chacko, Murungathery House, Chiyyaram, Thrissur
- Rajan M.S., Marath House, Chiyyaram P.O., Thrissur
- Shemeera, Panikkaveettil House, Ollukkara, Thrissur
- Sijo P Johnson, Pulikkottil House, Kanattukara P.O., Thrissur
- Binoy K.C., Kundayil House, Perngavu P.O., Thrissur
- Sajimon P.N., Poolakkaparambil House, Chembukavu P.O., Thrissur
- Bijesh T.R., Tharayil House, Manakodi P.O., Thrissur
- Sunil Kumar, Sreenilayam House, Poovanchira, Thrissur
- Ramesh P.K., Ponganamoola House, Kozhukully, Thrissur
- Rahul A.R., Ainikun nan House, Nadathara P.O., Thrissur
- Babu K.K., Kadavil House, Koorkancherry Village, Thrissur
- Sathyanarayanan K.S., Kathirapilly House, Pattikkad P.O., Thrissur
- Sinosh P.T., Parappan House, Anakkallu P.O., Avinissery, Thrissur
- Radharishnan K., Kuttenellur P.O., Ollur Village, Thrissur
- Nithish, Malakkaran House, Madakkathara P.O., Thrissur
- Jerin, Mekkatukulam House, Anjur P.O., Mundur, Puttekkara, Thrissur
- Francis, Chezhoor House, Avinissery P.O., Thrissur
- Sukumaran K.V., Kuttichira House, Poothole, Thrissur
- Kabeer, Kattukar an House, Cherpu P.O., Thrissur
- Shabu, Raymarakkar House, Nedupuzha P.O., Thrissur
- Haridas C.K., Cheruthanil Kunnath House, Pootore P.O., MG Kavu, Thrissur
- Babu, Chulliparambil House, Manakody P.O., Thrissur
- Shamsudheen K.A., Kootheri House, Ollukara P.O., Thrissur
- Limson, Kuthirapanth ivila House, Paral am P.O., Thrissur
- Davis, Chittilapilly House, Thrissur Municipality, Thrissur
- Sruthy Venugopal, Panchavallil House, Temple Avenue Road, Ayyanthole P.O., Thrissur
- Santhosh P.P., Parathattel House, Pattikkad P.O., Thrissur
- Krian Kumar, Koyath House, Peringavu P.O., Thrissur
- Shabu P.K., Pandarathil House, Thrikkumarakudam, Thrissur
- Thomason C.L., Chirayath House, Veluthur P.O., Thrissur
- Manoj K.M., Karimkulam House, Varadiy am, Thrissur
- Surendran P.K., Puthussery Valley, Elth uruth P.O., Thrissur
- Ragesh V.R., Valiyapurakkal House, Eravimangal am P.O, Thrissur
- Vishag Davis, Edapully House, Avanue P.O., Thrissur
- Shareendra Jith, Sreevalsam House, Peringavu P.O., Thrissur
- Sreejith A.S., Alukkal House, Kuttanellur, Thrissur
- Praveenkumar K.S., Koottali House, Ollur P.O., Thrissur
- Rajan A.R., Ayinikkunnu House, Kuttanellur P.O., Thrissur
- Sreera j T., Manazhu House, Pallissery P.O., Thrissur
- Shaji, Ambazhapully House, Akakrapuram P.O., Kurichik kara, Thrissur
- Sajjan Paul, Tharayil House, Kurichik kara P.O., Thrissur
- Sukumaran K.G., Kallattuvalappil House, Kurichik kara P.O., Thrissur
- Abilash, Muttichukkaran House, Ayyanthole P.O., Thrissur
- Ranjith Narayanan, Mooth edath House, Ancherry P.O., Thrissur
- Anto, Thaikkattil House, Kuttur P.O., Thrissur
- Sinto, Thaikatt il House, Kuttr Village, Thrissur
- Shajan V.M., Vadakkan House, Velappaya P.O., Thrissur
- Francis, Mekkatukulam House, Velappaya P.O., Thrissur
- Sundaran, Kizhakkumbr y House, Elthuruth P.O., Thrissur
- Sasi M.T., Muttissery House, Ramavarapuram P.O., Thrissur
- Pauly Joseph, Vadakkoot House, Parappur P.O., Thrissur
- Joy A.P., Amayaparambil House, Ancherry P.O., Thrissur
- Prince, Koonamplavu House, Vadakkumpuram, Thrissur
- Shibu, Thaivalappil House, Puthur P.O., Thrissur
- Prahladhan Karanath Prabhakaran, Karanath House, Pullazhi P.O., Thrissur
- Siju K.K., Kallayil House, Eravu P.O., Thrissur
- Abin Baby, Kadambanattu House, Chuvannaman nu P.O., Thrissur
- Jomy Francis, Pavarat t ikaran House, Madakkathara P.O., Thrissur
- R ajesh, Puthenchira House, Punkunnam P.O., Thrissur
- Rema, Karumathil House, Puthur P.O.
- Manikantan P., Edaparam bath House, Cheroor, Thrissur
- Mohan an, Kajira House, Puthur, Thrissur
- Divy araj, Kombeesan House, Viyyur P.O., Thrissur
- Sareen, Olakkodu House, Kuttur P.O., Thrissur
- Sajeesh, Mambil ly House, Anthikkad, Thrissur
- Shamsudheen, Karappamvettil House, Koorkancherry, Thrissur
- Girish Kumar, Mattalak al House, Lalo or P.O., Thrissur
- Vimal, Thazhathup rambil House, Ayyanthole, Thrissur
Respondents
- Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur- 680 609, rep. by its Secretary
- The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur- 680 609
- The Regional Transport Officer, Thrissur- 680 609
- The Thrissur Corporation, Thrissur, rep. by its Secretary- 680 609
- The Secretary, Thrissur Corporation, M.O. Road, Thrissur- 680 609
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Adv. P.K. Anil
Counsels for Respondents
- • Sri. P.M. Manoj, Government Pleader
- • Sri. Santhosh P. Poduval, Senior Counsel, Thrissur Corporation
Case Synopsis & Summary
This is a Kerala High Court writ petition (WP(C) No. 42134 of 2017 (N)) filed by contract carriage permit holders of autorickshaws in Thrissur. The petitioners claim they have obtained orders from the State Appellate Transport Tribunal (SAT) varying their permits and seek directions to the respondents (RTA Thrissur, its secretary, the RTO Thrissur, the Thrissur Corporation and its secretary) to receive the fees for variation of the permits and to issue permits in terms of the SAT orders. The court notes that issues similar to those raised in this petition have already been considered by a prior Single Judge in Rajesh v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, reported at 2014(3) KLT 341, and explicitly confirms the directions therein without deviation. In the result, the court disposes of the writ petition by directing the respondents to issue the permits to the petitioners as applied for, in conformity with the SAT judgment, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Overall, the decision reinforces adherence to SAT orders and imposes a time-bound compliance framework to implement permit variations, thereby enabling petitioners to operate under the altered permits with sworn compliance by the authorities.
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The petitioners, 81 individuals, are contract carriage permit holders who have obtained SAT orders varying their permits. They contend that the respondents must (i) accept the fee for variation of the permits and (ii) issue permits in strict accordance with the SAT orders. They rely on the SAT decision and request expeditious implementation, arguing that refusal or delay undermines the SAT orders and the rights acquired by the petitioners under those orders. They seek no further relief beyond enforcement of the SAT-based variations and the associated fee receipt. They emphasize the need for uniform application of SAT judgments across the RTA/RTO and the Corporation to avoid arbitrary refusals and ensure orderly, legally compliant operation of autorickshaws under the varied permits.
Contentions of Respondents
The respondents contest the petition by stressing administrative considerations and the need to adhere to existing statutory frameworks and local regulations. They contend that any variation in permits and related fees must follow due process, fee schedules, and documentary verification. The respondents argue that compliance with SAT orders must be coordinated with the state’s enforcement and regulatory mechanisms, with proper follow-up by the RTA/RTO and the municipal corporation. They request that the court frame directions that ensure that permit variations, fee collections, and subsequent issuance occur within the bounds of law and the SAT decision, without creating unilateral, ad hoc changes that could affect other permit holders and public transport policy.
Cited Precedents (1)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rajesh v. Secretary, Regional Transport Authority | 2014(3) KLT 341 | Positive | Judgment cited by the High Court and its directions confirmed; it guided the present decision and the Court followed it. |
Diagnostic Tool
Does this judgment govern your specific facts?
Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Mijo and others v. Regional Transport Authority, Thrissur and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.