Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2005 DIGILAW 262 (SC)

RAJASEKHARAN G. v. KALOOR JOSEPH

2005-02-10

N.S.HEGDE, S.B.SINHA

body2005
ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. In these SLPs the petitioners are challenging an order of the High Court in the original petition as well as in the review petition which, in fact, has only upheld and given directions to the State Government to implement the directions issued in an earlier writ petition reported in Ernakulam Distt. Private Bus Operators Assn. v. RTA1 as against which some of the aggrieved operators had approached this Court and the said order of the High Court and directions given therein have been upheld by the dismissal of the said SLP by this Court. We do not think that these SLPs deserve any further consideration, therefore, the special leave petitions are dismissed. SLP (C) No. 4186 of 2004 3. This petition has been filed by the State against an order made by the High Court on 30-1-2004 in a contempt petition wherein the High Court directed the State to comply with the directions issued in the main petition by ensuring that every stage carriage and heavy transport vehicle in the State is fitted with a speed governor on or before 29-2-2004. The actual direction issued in the writ petition is not challenged by the State but the learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the State has already issued a necessary notification in regard to the fixation of speed governors in the goods as well as other heavy vehicles for the new vehicles only. He further submits that sufficient number of speed governors are not available in the market, therefore, it is practically not possible to comply with the directions issued by the High Court in regard to old vehicles within the time stipulated by the High Court hence, prays for time till 30-12-2005. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents disputes the fact as to the non-availability of sufficient number of speed governors and opposes the extension of time. 5. However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, we consider it appropriate to extend the time granted by the High Court to comply with its direction in regard to fixation of speed governors up to 30-9-2005. We make it clear that no further time will be granted and the State of Kerala shall comply with the direction issued by the High Court within the extended period by us. 6. We make it clear that no further time will be granted and the State of Kerala shall comply with the direction issued by the High Court within the extended period by us. 6. We direct the presence of the Secretary, Department of Transport in the contempt petition pending before the High Court be kept in abeyance till 30-9-2005 in view of the above extension of time granted by us. SLP (C) No. 5514 of 2004 7. Delay condoned. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is seeking permission to withdraw this petition since the main matter is pending before the High Court. The special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Court Masters