Rajendra Singh Chhabra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 154 of 2017 • Rajendra Singh Chhabra S/o Late Shri Santosh Singh Chhabra, Aged About 66 Years, Transporter, R/o : Ring Road, Namnakala, Ambikapur Distt. Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Transport Department, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur-492002 (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Secretary, State Transport Authority, Chhattisgarh, Pandri, New Bus Stand, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner Shri S. K. Bajpai, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri U. N. S. Deo, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 20/01/2017 1.

It is put forth by the learned counsel for the petitioner that before reorganization of the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh, the petitioner was allowed regional permit from Ambikapur to Baidhan. Since after 01.11.2000, the said regional permit was converted into an inter state permit whose validity expired on 30.11.2016. The petitioner

moved application for renewal of the inter state permit, which is pending consideration and in the meanwhile the petitioner is allowed temporary permit for last about 4 months, however, no orders have been passed on the prayer for renewal of inter state permit. Even though, the application was part of the agenda for the meeting of the concerned authorities of the State of Chhattisgarh and State of Madhya Pradesh in accordance with the terms of reciprocal transport agreement concluded between the two states. He would submit that the petitioner's inter state permit should be renewed at the earliest.

2.

It is not for this Court to issue or cancel any permit, which is the job of the concerned authority. Depending upon the concluded reciprocal agreement over an inter state route and other terms and conditions setforth in the Motor Vehicles Act, if the petitioner has complied with all the necessary formalities and is eligible in accordance with law, the concerned authorities are expected to take a decision in the matter at the earliest. Let the respondents take appropriate decision in the matter at the earliest, preferably within a period of 2 months from today. 3.

Till the petitioner's application is decided, the subject slot/vacancy for the subject route shall not be considered for issuance of permit in favour of any other person and

the petitioner shall be allowed to operate the permit in accordance with the terms thereof.

4.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the observation as stated supra.

5.

Certified copy today.

Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala