Mohd. Noore Haqu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1812 of 2016 • Mohd. Noore Haqu S/o Abdul Haqe, Aged About 50 Years Kharsiya Naka, Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Transport Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. Regional Transport Authority, Surguja, Division Surguja Place Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh).

3. Vijay Kumar Gupta, Prop. Durga Motor Service, Purana Bus Stand, Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh).

---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. S.K. Bajpayee, Advocate For Respondent/State Mr. Shashank Thakur, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 20/7/2016

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the RTA, Surguja granting Regular Stage Carriage Permit in favour of respondent No.3.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is ex facie illegal and has been passed in excess of jurisdiction, therefore, the writ petition is maintainable.

4. In case of wrong exercise of jurisdiction, the statutory remedy of

revision before the revisional authority is equally efÏcacious.

5. Had it been a case of want of jurisdiction or violation of principles of nature justice, this Court may entertain a writ petition directly, however, in the given set of facts, the petitioner should have availed alternative remedy.

6. In view of availability of alternative remedy of Revision under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the writ petition is disposed of with direction that if the petitioner prefers a Revision before the revisional authority within a period of 30 days from today, the same shall be heard and decided by the revisional authority in accordance with law at the earliest preferably within a period of 03 months from the date of its submission. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna