Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1940
WP(C).No. 32535 of 2017
PETITIONER(S)
-------------
K.P. ABDUL KAREEM,
S/O. PAREED,
AGED 44 YEARS, KATTETHAN HOUSE,
KANJIRAKKAD, PERUMBAVOOR.
BY ADV.SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.
2. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.
3. THE ESTATE OFFICER,
KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.
4. THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER,
PERUMBAVOOR 683542.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.CHACKO, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-03-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TS
WP(C).No. 32535 of 2017 (N)
--------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TENDER/AUCTION CONDITION OF
THE KSRTC VIDE MEMORANDUM NO.PS1-010958/2011
DATED 05.04.2011.
EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT
TRANSPORT OFFICER, KSRTC, PERUMBAVOOR DATED
20.06.2017.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.07.2017 IN
W.P.(C) NO.22944 OF 2017.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT SUBMITTED BY
A.A.VIJAYAN, INSPECTOR KSRTC.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE VIDE
NO.G2-2654/2017/PERUMBAVOOR DATED 30.08.2017
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CASH RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE
KSRTC REGARDING THE REMITTANCE OF THE LICENSE
FEE AND GST FOR CANTEEN.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PREMISES WHERE
THE CANTEEN IS FUNCTIONING.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT
DATED 06.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PUBLIC
INFORMATION OFFICER, KSRTC, PERUMBAVOOR DATED
06.10.2017.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 05.10.2017 ISSUED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER AGAINST EXHIBIT P-9 NOTICE.
EXHIBIT P11
TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE
PETITIONER WITH THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P12
TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.2.2012 VIDE ES2-000485/2010
ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, TECHNICAL.
EXHIBIT P13
TRUE COPY OF THE SANCTIONING ORDER DATED 29.12.2012.
TS
WP(C).No. 32535 of 2017 (N)
--------------------------
EXHIBIT P14
TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, TECHNICAL DATED 10.4.2012.
ADDL.EXT.P15 TRUE COPY OF THE DEED OF LICENSE EXECUTED
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE KSRTC DATED
15.8.2013.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT R1[A]. COPY OF THE TENDER NOTICE DATED 9.3.12 ISSUED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT R1[B]. COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE DATED 22.12.17 ISSUED
BY THE SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY.
/TRUE COPY/
PS TO JUDGE
TS
04/04/2018
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P(C).No. 32535 of 2017
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of March, 2018
JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: “i. issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writs, directions or orders, calling for the records leading to Exhibit P9 and quash the same. ii. declare that the demand made in Exhibit P9 is illegal and is against Exhibit P1 tender condition and no additional licence fee can be demanded for the temporary shed which is being used as the kitchen of the canteen. iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writs, directions or orders directing the 4th respondent
to consider
Exhibit
P10 representation submitted by the petitioner and to recall Exhibit P9 demand now issued forthwith.”
2.The essential contention raised by the petitioner is that Exhibit P9 notice has been issued without notice to the petitioner. Though the petitioner has submitted Exhibit P10 in reply to Exhibit P9 notice, it is submitted that, cause of action is being taken against the petitioner without considering the contentions advanced in Exhibit P10. WP(C).32535/17 2
3.In the above view of the matter, without making any reference to the merits of the matter, I am of the opinion that Exhibit P10 reply submitted by the petitioner is liable to be considered by the 2nd respondent with notice to the petitioner also. This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Exhibit P10 reply submitted by the petitioner. It is further directed that Exhibit P9 notice shall be enforced without orders being passed on Exhibit P10 as directed above. ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE vgs21/3
