2025:KER:28635 W.P (C) No.13708/2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P. THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 13708 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: PRAJEESH KUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. PANKAJAKSHA KURUP, PRAJEESH BHAVAN, KANJIPPADAM P.O., AMBALAPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688005 BY ADVS. RILGIN V.GEORGE K.T.RAVEENDRAN AKSHARA K.P. MEERA J. MENON ARATHY P.S. ANAGHA MANOJ RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001 2 THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, ALAPPUZHA, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688001 3 THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 695023 4 THE STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM-DIRICT COURT COMPLEX, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011 2025:KER:28635 W.P (C) No.13708/2025 -2- OTHER PRESENT: SRI. P.S.APPU, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2025:KER:28635 W.P (C) No.13708/2025 -3- J U D G M E N T The petitioner has approached this court being aggrieved by the fact that the timings have not been finalized in respect of a regular permit granted to the petitioner vide Ext.P1 proceedings of the Regional Transport Authority, Alappuzha. 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that the 3rd respondent (KSRTC) herein has preferred M.V. A.R.P No.24/2025 challenging Ext.P1 decision before the State Transport Appellate Authority. It is submitted that the timings have not been settled taking into consideration the fact that M.V.A.R.P No.24/2025 is pending consideration before the Tribunal. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fact that M.V. A.R.P No.24/2025 is pending is no ground to delay of finalization of timings. It is submitted that the petitioner is put to grave prejudice on account of the fact that the permit has not been issued after finalziation of timings. It is also submitted that M.V.A.R.P No.24/2025 has been filed with a delay of 89 days. 4. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, KSRTC would submit that there is considerable merit in the contentions taken by the KSRTC in M.V. A.R.P No.24/2025 and this court may not direct finalization of timings and issuance of the permit pending adjudication of M.V.A.R.P No.24/2025. 2025:KER:28635 W.P (C) No.13708/2025 -4- 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing that if the 3rd respondent fails to obtain any interim order staying operation of Ext.P1 within a period of two weeks from today (03-04-2025), 2nd respondent shall take steps to finalize the timings in respect of Ext.P1 grant. I make it clear that the Tribunal needs to consider the application for stay filed by the 3rd respondent on merits only if it decides to condone the delay of 89 days in filing the above revision petition. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- GOPINATH P. JUDGE AMG 2025:KER:28635 W.P (C) No.13708/2025 -5- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13708/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE RTA DATED 30.10.2024 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS IN M.V.A.R.P NO: 24/2025 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF TIMING CONFERENCE DATED 13.03.2025