Hazarat Ali Sirsi. v. The Regional Transport Authority, Represented By Member Secretary.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

WRIT PETITION NO. 614 OF 2015 HAZARAT ALI SIRSI.

... Petitioner

Versus

THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY MEMBER SECRETARY.

... Respondent Mr. C. A. Countinho and Mr. Shailesh Redkar, Advocates for the Petitioner.

Coram:- F. M. REIS, J.

Date:- 7th August, 2015 ORAL ORDER Heard Shri Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner.

2. Shri Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, brought to my notice that the State Transport Authority by Order dated 17.09.2014, has erroneously remanded the matter to the Regional Transport Authority at South Goa, to re-examine the application filed by the Petitioner for permit in the light of the observations made therein. Learned Counsel has also taken me through the impugned Order passed by the State Transport Authority to point out that the reasons for such remand are not at all justifiable in law. Learned Counsel has also taken me through the Circular relied upon by such Authority to point out that such Authority by no stretch of imagination creates any bar to the Petitioner to obtain such

WP/614/2015 permit. When the learned Counsel was asked as to why an Order passed in September, 2014 was being challenged only in the month of April, 2015, it was pointed out that even after the remand, the Regional Transport authority has not proceeded to decide the application filed by the Petitioner for permit expeditiously.

3. Taking note of the said contents, without going into the merits of the contentions raised by Mr. C. A. Coutinho, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, I find it appropriate to dispose of the above Writ Petition by directing the Regional Transport Authority to examine the application filed by the Petitioner to issue a permit based on the letter dated 29.11.2011 in the light of the directions of the State Transport Authority in the Order dated 17.09.2014 as expeditiously as possible in any event within two months from the date of receipt of this Order.

4. Needless to say, all the contentions of the Petitioners are left open to be examined by the Authorities in accordance with law.

5. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. F. M. REIS, J.

arp/*