Thursday, Dec 11, 2003
Thursday, Dec 11, 2003 |
| Southern States | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Kerala
By Our Staff Reporter
The Bench, comprising Justice S. Sanakrasubban and Justice A.K. Basheer, also issued notice to the State Government and the KSRTC. The petition was filed by the Sabarimala Ayyappa Seva Trust for Amenities(SASTA), Pathanamthitta. The petitioner said that the KSRTC operated two buses to Pampa daily from Vaikom and Panthanalam. In fact, these buses had been granted ordinary permits under Rule 144 of the Kerala Motor Vehicles Rules. However, passengers were charged fares applicable to the fast passenger buses. As per the notification issued by the KSRTC, passenger travelling in ordinary buses would be charged 35 paise per kilometre, while passengers of fast passenger buses had to shell out 43 paise a kilometre. In fact, a large number of buses were diverted by the Corporation from other depots and run either as fast passenger or super fast services though only ordinary stage carriage permits had been issued for the buses. The petitioner said that it was only from Sabarimala pilgrims that a 30 per cent additional charge was levied. No additional charges were collected when buses were run during other festival seasons. Though buses operating during other festivals spanning only one to eight days ran as ordinary buses, pilgrims travelling to Sabarimala were charged 30 per cent additional rates plus the fare of fast passenger and super fast services. The petitioner, therefore, said that the method of charging pilgrims travelling to Sabarimala was patently discriminatory. The petition sought a direction to the KSRTC not to collect higher fare from Sambarimala pilgrims travelling in ordinary buses.
Petition on Killi incident
A Bench, comprising Justice K.A. Abdul Gafoor and Justice J.M. James, admitted a writ petition seeking a direction to the State Government to appoint a judicial commission to inquire into the police atrocities in Killi and suggests measures to check atrocities by the police. The petition was filed by an advocate, Vincent Panikulangara. The petition also sought a CBI inquiry to unearth the alleged conspiracy that had allegedly resulted in the police atrocities in Killi. The petition also pleaded that a direction be issued to the State Government to compensate the 17 victims of police atrocities in Killi and realise the amount by confiscating the salary, retirement benefits and other assets of the officers responsible for the atrocities. According to the petitioner, the alleged police excess took place on October 5, 2003. A large contingent of police had gone to Killi in Thiruvananthapuram and brutally manhandled the local people. It was a sequel to an incident in which the people had attacked the police who came in search of a youth who had ridden a motorcycle without wearing a helmet. The petitioner pointed out that the police had violated human rights, torturing innocent children and women who were sleeping in their houses.
Ombudsman's rights
A Bench comprising the Chief Justice, J.L. Gupta, and Justice A.K. Basheer, held that the Ombudsman for the Local Self-government Bodies had no power to keep a panchayat council under suspended animation. Quashing the Ombudsman's order keeping the Sreemoolanagaram Panchayat Council in Ernakulam under the suspended animation, the court held that as per the provisions of the Kerala Panchayati Raj Act, the Ombudsman could recommend remedial measures to the Government which should take a final decision on these recommendations. The Ombudsman's order came on a complaint filed by the Aluva-based Association for Environmental Protection .The complaint said that the panchayat was not implementing the directions of the High Court for abating pollution and other environmental issues relating to the functioning of a brick-kiln. The Bench had earlier stayed the Ombudsman's order.
Payment of vehicle tax
Justice G. Sivarajan held that the Transport Department's order requiring inter-State tourist vehicle operators to pay vehicle tax whenever their vehicles entered the State was discriminatory. The court ruled that the tourist permit operators were entitled to pay the tax quarterly. The court said the stand of the Transport Department was against the scheme relating to levy of taxes in the Motor Vehicles Act. In fact, the liability to pay the tax was not based on the entry of the vehicles in the State, but was on the use of vehicle. The petitions were filed by operators from Karnataka.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
