← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/5577/2017disposed

Shambhu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2017-08-21Mr. Justice Shivaji Pandey3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.5571 of 2017 =========================================================== Kaushal Kishore Singh, aged about 55 years, Son of Shree Ram Balak Singh, Resident of Village- Sheikhpur Akharaghat, Ahiyapur, P.S.- Ahiyapur, DistrictMuzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Divisional Commissioner, Muzaffarpur cum Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, Office Situated at Divisional Commissioner's Compound, Muzaffarpur.

3. Joint Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, office situated at Divisional Commissioner's Compound, Muzaffarpur.

4. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, through its Administrator, office situated at Sultan Palace, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.

5. Divisional Manager, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondents With =========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5577 of 2017 =========================================================== Shambhu Kumar Singh, Son of Jaggnath Prasad Singh, Resident of Krishnapuri, Bhagwanpur Chowk, P.S.-Sadar, District-Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary, Department, of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Divisional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, Office Situated at Divisional Commissioner's Compound, Muzaffarpur.

3. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, Office Situated at Divisional Commissioner's Compound, Muzaffarpur.

4. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, through its Administrator, Office Situated at Sultan Palace, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.

5. The Chief of Operation, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Muzaffarpur.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5571 of 2017 dt.21-08-2017 2/3 .... .... Respondents With =========================================================== Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5597 of 2017 =========================================================== Chandra Bhanu Singh, aged about 55 years, Son of Nawal Kishore Singh Resident of Village- Harhiya, P.S. Siwaipatti, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Transport, Government of Bihar, Patna.

2. Divisional Commissioner, Muzaffarpur cum Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, Office situated at Divisional Commissioner's compound, Muzaffarpur.

3. Joint Commissioner-cumSecretary, Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur, Office situated at Divisional Commissioner's Compound, Muzaffarpur.

4. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, through its Administrator, Office situated at Sultan Palace, Bir chand Patel Path, Patna.

5. Divisional Manager,Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Muzaffarpur. .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

(In CWJC No.5571 of 2017) For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Ratna Kumari, A.C. to P.A.A.G.-2 (In CWJC No.5577 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Raghwendra Kumar-S.C.-22 B.S.R.T.C. : Mrs. Archana Palkar, Adv. (In CWJC No.5597 of 2017) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kumar- G.P.-24 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 21-08-2017 Heard the parties.

Patna High Court CWJC No.5571 of 2017 dt.21-08-2017 3/3 Let the counter affidavit filed by the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation be taken on record.

In these cases, the petitioners are seeking that without formulation of the route as provided under Section 68(3)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the licences are being granted by the respondents.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have raised the objection before the authority, but they have not taken care to go into the objection raised by them and granted permanent permit.

If the petitioners are really aggrieved, they may challenge the action of the authority before the Tribunal, which is functioning in terms of the provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act and the Rules framed thereunder. While considering the issue of limitation, the Tribunal will take into consideration the pendency of these cases before this Court.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, these writ applications are disposed of.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 25.08.2017 Transmission Date N/A.