Vinita Gupta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1574 of 2017 • Vinita Gupta W/o Harsh Gupta Aged About 40 Years Jain Mandir Road, Jagdalpur, Distt - Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through, The Secretary, Department Of Transport Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh. • Additional Transport Commissioner, Office Off Transport Commissioner, 3rd Floor, Indravati Bhavan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh. • The Regional Transport Authority, Office Of The Regional Transport Authority, Raipur, Distt - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Shri Vivek Verma, Advocate.

For the Respondent/State : Shri R.K. Gupta, Dy. Advocate General. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble the Vacation Judge Order on board 02/06/2017

1. This petition is brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct respondent No.3-The Regional Transport Authority, Raipur to decide the application dated 8.1.2017 by putting a counter signature in favour of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner has filed an application for grant/renewal/counter signature of the stage carriage permit on 17.01.2017, in respect of which a notice has been received vide Annexure-P/2 dated 23.2.2017 in which the name of the petitioner is mentioned in Serial No.34, fixing a date of 4.3.2017 for giving appearance for submitting arguments. The petitioner appeared on the given date and has submitted all the documents. No date has been fixed for final hearing of the case and the application for grant of permit for stage of carriage is still pending. Permit for the such carriage has been though issued, it has not been counter signed by respondent No.3. It is prayed that the respondent authority may be directed to finalize the matter in accordance with law.

3. Learned counsel for the State submits that he would not dispute the petition limited to the extent of prayer made in the petition.

4. Considering the facts that respondent authorities have though entertained the application of petitioner and have received the documents on submission, but no date has been fixed for final hearing of the case because of which the issuance of permit along with counter sign of respondent No.3 is still pending, the case has been kept in abeyance by the respondent authority without assigning of any reason in it, hence, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner's application at the earliest, preferably within a period of two weeks from today from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Vacation Judge Nisha