Skip to main content
← back
Informative

Kerala High Court Directs Regional Transport Authority to Decide Representation on Bus Timing Dispute.

Update / Judgement Date

30 Oct 2025

Source

WCP News Bulletin

Author

Sakshi Bhardwaj — WCP Legal Desk

Reading Time

3 min read

Civil LawOther Legal Matters
Kerala High Court Directs Regional Transport Authority to Decide Representation on Bus Timing Dispute.
WCP News Bulletin
Headnote:

The Kerala High Court directed the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Kottayam, to consider and decide within two months a representation filed by the petitioner seeking parity in the running time allotted to his stage carriage in comparison with that of the additional 3rd respondent’s vehicle. The Court observed that since the petitioner’s representation was pending, it was appropriate for the RTA to examine the issue after hearing both parties.


Background:
  1. The petitioner, Ajin Aniyan, aged 32 years, from Kottayam, owned a stage carriage bearing registration KL-05-AE-3285.
  2. He filed a representation (Exhibit P6) before the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Kottayam, alleging discrepancies in running time allotted to his bus and that of the additional 3rd respondent, Annamma Abraham, widow of the late M.M. Abraham.
  3. The petitioner sought uniform running time parity at 2.30 minutes per kilometre for both stage carriages.
  4. The RTA, through its statement, submitted that the timing conference was held on 8 March 2022 after due notice to all affected parties, and at that time the petitioner did not raise any such objections.


Court’s Observations:
  1. Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. noted that Exhibit P6 representation was still pending before the RTA, and it was appropriate for the authority to consider and decide it in accordance with law.
  2. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner’s grievance, as the appropriate forum to examine the issue was the RTA itself.
  3. The Court also emphasized that the decision must be taken after giving both the petitioner and the additional 3rd respondent an opportunity to be heard, ensuring principles of natural justice.
  4. Both parties were permitted to produce materials supporting their respective contentions before the authority.


Decision:
  1. The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam, to:
  2. Consider and decide Exhibit P6 representation in accordance with law.
  3. Provide notice and hearing to both the petitioner and the additional 3rd respondent.
  4. Complete the decision-making process within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.


Legal Provisions Discussed:
  1. Article 226 of the Constitution of India – empowers High Courts to issue writs for enforcement of legal rights.
  2. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – governs stage carriage permits and regulation of timings under Section 72 and related rules.
  3. Principle of Natural Justice – ensures that parties affected by administrative decisions have a right to be heard.

The judgment reaffirms that when an administrative representation is pending before a competent authority, the High Court, instead of deciding the merits, may direct expeditious disposal of the representation in accordance with law. It also highlights the need for fairness, transparency, and hearing both parties in resolving disputes related to stage carriage timings and route parity.


Citation: 2025:KER:81817

Case: Ajin Aniyan v. Regional Transport Authority, Kottayam & Ors.

Court: High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Coram: Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.

Date of Decision: 30 October 2025