Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader as also the counsel for the 3rd respondent.
2. The petitioner was aggrieved with Exhibit P5 settlement of timings made in favour of the service of the 2nd respondent, which is now being operated by the 3rd respondent, admittedly without any notice to the rival stage carriage operators. Despite Exhibit P5 being in implementation of Circular No.D3/875/STA/2005 dated 08.11.2011, notice to rival operators is imperative. Clash of timing has to be avoided when revision is made, which shall be only with notice to rival operators.
3. For the reasons stated above, Exhibit P5 is set aside and the 1st respondent is directed to convene a timing conference and settle the timings of the service operated by the 3rd respondent, within a period of two months from today.
WP(C).No.26533 of 2014 - 2 -
Since there was an interim stay granted at the stage of admission, Exhibit P5 will not be given effect to and the 3rd respondent's operation shall be continued with the then existing timings, till a decision is taken as directed above.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
vku.
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran, Judge ( true copy )