Wasan Singh v. Regional Transport Authority, Bastar
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P. (C) No.
of 201
1. Kamaljeet Kaur, Aged 49 years, S/o Late Satwat Singh
2. Avtar Singh, Aged 59 years, S/o Shri Kikkar Singh, Both Office at New Bus Stand, Pandri, Raipur 492001 (Mahendra Travels).
Petitioner No. 2 Through Power of Attorney Ajay Singh, Aged 26 years, S/o Late Satwant Singh, Ravi Nagar, Shukla Colony, Raipur 492001 ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Regional Transport Authority, Bastar, Jagdalpur.
2. Kanker Roadways, Near Gandhi Garden, Civil Line, Raipur.
3. Payal Travels, Through Partner Piyush Deshlahara, G.E. Road, Durg
4. Manish Travels, Prop. Manish Jain, GE Road, Durg ---- Respondents W.P. (C) No.
1. Wasan Singh, Aged 74 years, S/o Jogender Singh, Pandri, Raipur CG 492 001
2. Surjit Singh, Aged 29 years, S/o Jaswinder Singh Both office at New Bus Stand, Pandri, Raipur 492001 (Mahendra Travels) Both Through Power of Attorney, Ajay Singh, Aged 26 years, S/o Late Satwant Singh, Ravi Nagar, Shukla Colony, Raipur 492001 ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Regional Transport Authority, Bastar, Jagdalpur.
2. Kanker Roadways, Near Gandhi Garden, Civil Line, Raipur.
3. Payal Travels, Through Partner Piyush Deshlahara, G.E. Road, Durg
4. Manish Travels, Prop. Manish Jain, GE Road, Durg
---- Respondents W.P. (C) No.
8 20 of 201
1. Mohan Singh, Aged 40 Years, S/o Mahendra Travels, New Bus Stand, P.S. Pandri, PO Govind Nagar HO, Raipur 492001 Through Power of Attorney, Aakashdip Gill, S/o Lakhwant Singh, Aged about 28 years, Ravi Nagar, Shukla Colony, PS Civil Line, PO Govind Nagar, HO, ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. Regional Transport Authority, Bastar, Jagdalpur.
2. Kanker Roadways, Near Gandhi Garden, Civil Line, Raipur.
3. Payal Travels, Through Partner Piyush Deshlahara, G.E. Road, Durg
4. Manish Travels, Prop. Manish Jain, GE Road, Durg ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Raja Sharma, Advocate.
For Respondents : Mr. Sudeep Johri, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 0 5 /07/201 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that during pendency of the petition, permits have been issued by the Authority concerned and, therefore, he may be granted liberty to challenge those permits by way of revision before the competent authority.
(2) If such challenge is made, the competent authority will consider and decide the same in accordance with law. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file application for condonation of delay in filing the said revision. (3) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-