Pratik Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10726 of 2019 ====================================================== Pratik Kumar Singh Son of Sri Praveen Kumar Singh Resident of Marwari School Road, Darbhanga, P.S-Town (Darbhanga), District-Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State Of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Transport, Bihar, Patna.

2.

Divisional Commissioner, Darbhanga Division cum Chairman, Regional Transport Authority, Darbhanga, Divisional Commissioners Compound, Darbhanga.

3.

Joint Commissioner cum Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Darbhanga, Divisional Commissioners Compound, Darbhanga. 4.

Bisheswar Rajak Son of Buchchi Rajak Resident of Baisi Panchayat, Ward No 3, P.S-Karjain, District-Supaul.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Raghwendra Kumar (SC22) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 28-06-2019 The defect of delay of six days in refile is ignored. Petitioner in the present case is aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order as contained in Memo No. 10-5/2019209/Pari dated 28.02.2009 passed by the Joint Commissionercum-Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Darbhanga whereby the objection preferred by the petitioner against the grant of permit to the private respondent has been rejected. The grievance of the petitioner was that the permit was granted without formulating the routes. The impugned order takes note of that and after dealing with the same comes to a

Patna High Court CWJC No.10726 of 2019(2) dt.28-06-2019 2/2 conclusion that now vide notification no. 709 dated 23.01.2019 the route has been formulated.

Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that against the impugned order he has a statutory remedy of appeal/revision under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In the aforesaid view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ application with liberty to seek his remedy in accordance with law.

The writ application is, thus, disposed of with liberty as prayed.

In case any question of limitation arises before the concerned authority, the same shall be considered keeping in mind that the petitioner was pursuing his remedy before this Court.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) avin/-ved U