In Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Chhabil

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNESDAY,THE 26TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018 / 4TH ASWINA, 1940 WP(C).No. 24255 of 2018 PETITIONERS: DILEEP PUTHEN VEETTILAGED 32 YEARSS/O GOPALAKRISHNAN, SHANTHI NIVAS, MANISSERY, VANIYAMKULAM, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.I.DINESH MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695 014. 2THE SECRETARYREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, PALAKKAD 678 001.3THE REGIOAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITYPALAKKAD 678 001. 4MARUDAMBIKA NW/O R. KRISHNAN, THEKKEPAVADY, PAZHAMBALACODE P.O, PALAKKAD 678 001.W/O R. KRISHNAN, THEKKEPAVADY, PAZHAMBALACODE P.O, PALAKKAD 678 001. BY ADV. SRI.STALIN PETER DAVISSRI. K.P. HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON26.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT The petitioner who is a stage carriageoperator holding Ext.P1 permit in respect of stagecarriage bearing Registration No.KL-51/B-2400 onthe route Palakkad-Guruvayur operating as Limited Stop Ordinary Service with a settled set oftimings has filed this writ petition underArticle 226 of the Constitution of India, seekinga writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P8 notice dated10.07.2018 of the 2[nd] respondent Secretary of theRegional Transport Authority, Palakkad and a writof mandamus commanding the said respondent toconsider Ext.P10 request relating to the serviceof the 4[th] respondent on the route Palakkad-Guruvayur in respect of her stage carriage bearingRegistration No.KL-51/B-2400, operating as ExpressService for allotment of running time at the rateof 1.75 minutes per km as provided for in Ext.P9circular dated 21.04.2018, in the timing conference which is scheduled to be held on21.07.2018. admission to the 4[th] respondent, this Court passedthe following order: The learned Senior GovernmentPleader takes notice on admission forrespondents 1 to 3. Issue urgent noticeon admission by special messenger to the4[th] respondent returnable by 24.07.2018. 2.The learned Senior GovernmentPleader, on instructions, from the 2[nd]respondent Secretary of the RegionalTransport Authority would submit thatthe petitioner can participate in thetiming conference scheduled to conveneon 21.07.2018 and raise his objections,if any. 3.The learned Senior GovernmentPleader to file statement/counteraffidavit. 4.Any decision taken in thetiming conference scheduled to be heldon 21.07.2018 pursuant to Ext.P8notice, in so far as it relates to thestage carriage bearing registrationNo.KL-50/E-6622 of the 4[th] respondent(Sl.No.2 in Ext.P8) shall be subject tothe outcome of this writ petition.List on 24.07.2018. 3.Thereafter, on 06.08.2018, the petitionerfiled I.A.No.2/2018, seeking an order to amend thewrit petition by incorporating a challenge againstthe proceedings of the 2[nd] respondent bearingNo.C3/182/2016P dated 21.07.2018 and anotherapplication namely, I.A.No.1/2018 seeking an orderto stay the operation of the said proceedingsdated 21.07.2018, pending disposal of this writpetition. 4.Heard the learned counsel for thepetitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleaderappearing for respondents 1 to 3 and the learnedCounsel for the 4[th] respondent. 5.The relief sought for in this writpetition is confined to the timing conferencescheduled to be held on 21.07.2018, in terms ofExt.P8 notice. During the pendency of this writpetition, the timing conference has already beenconvened. The decision taken in that timingconference is sought to be challenged in this writpetition by way of an amendment. 4.Heard the learned counsel for thepetitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleaderappearing for respondents 1 to 3 and the learnedCounsel for the 4[th] respondent. 5.The relief sought for in this writpetition is confined to the timing conferencescheduled to be held on 21.07.2018, in terms ofExt.P8 notice. During the pendency of this writpetition, the timing conference has already beenconvened. The decision taken in that timingconference is sought to be challenged in this writpetition by way of an amendment. 6.The fact that the aforesaid proceedingsdated 21.07.2018 of the 2[nd] respondent isrevisable under Section 90 of the Motor VehiclesAct, 1988 is not in dispute. If the petitioner isfeeling aggrieved by the said proceedings of the2[nd] respondent, it is for him to invoke thestatutory remedy available under Section 90 of theAct. 7.In Commissioner of Income Tax V. Chhabil Das Agarwal [(2014) 1 SCC 603] the Apex Courtreiterated that, non-entertainment of a writpetition under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia when an efficacious alternative remedy isavailable is a rule of self-imposed limitation. Itis essentially a rule of policy, convenience anddiscretion rather than a rule of law. Undoubtedly,it is within the discretion of the High Court togrant relief under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India, despite the existence of alternativeremedy. However, High Court must not interfere ifthere is an adequate efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner and he hasapproached the High Court without availing thesame, unless he has made out an exceptional casewarranting such interference or there existssufficient ground to invoke the extraordinaryjurisdiction under Article 226. 8.In Pavithran V. State of Kerala (2009 (4) KHC 4), a Full Bench of this Court held that,whenever an adverse order is passed against aperson, unless the same is challenged before theappropriate forum, within the prescribed timelimit, the said order will become final. In the result, this writ petition standsdismissed as not maintainable without prejudice tothe right of the petitioner to challengeproceedingsbearingNo.C3/182/2016Pdated21.07.2018 of the 2[nd] respondent before the StateTransport Appellate Tribunal by invoking thestatutory remedy under Section 90 of the Act. I.A.Nos. 1/2018 and 2/2018 will stand closedwithout prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner. All legal and factual contentions raised by the petitioner are left open to be raised before theState Transport Appellate Tribunal at appropriatestage. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT OF KL 51 B 2400DATED 06-04-2018.DATED 06-04-2018. EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29-07-200007-2000 EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29-07-2011.07-2011. EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MVARP NO 296/11 DATED 19-11-2016.296/11 DATED 19-11-2016. EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN MVARP NO 91/2016 DATED 11-01-2017.91/2016 DATED 11-01-2017. EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OPC 428-17DATED 22-02-2017.DATED 22-02-2017. EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN RP 350/2017 DATED 18-09-2017.DATED 18-09-2017. EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10-07-2018.2018. EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE STA DECISION DATED 21-04-2018.04-2018. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 17-07- 2018. 2018. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL RR