Lachaman Singh v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal Punjab

C. W. P. No. 13691 of 2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Case No. : C. W. P. No. 13691 of 2015 Date of Decision : December 21, 2015 Lachaman Singh ....

Petitioner vs.

State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab and another ....

Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL.

* * * To be referred to Reporters or not ?

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? * * * Present :

Mr. P. S. Bawa, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Ranbir Singh Pathania, DAG, Punjab.

* * * DEEPAK SIBAL , J.

:

Through the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of order dated 04.11.2014 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Patiala, as also the order dated 08.05.2015 (Annexure P-7) passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as - the Tribunal).

After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is revealed that the petitioner's application for renewal of route permit was dismissed on the ground of unexplained delay of 02 years and 11 months. MONIKA 2015.12.23 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

C. W. P. No. 13691 of 2015 The petitioner was also found to have not providing transport services on the route in question, to the inconvenience of the public at large. It is further revealed that the petitioner has not even cleared the applicable taxes for the bus, which finds mention in the route permit in question. At the time of arguments, neither the delay was explained nor was it shown that the petitioner was regularly plying his bus on the route in question at the time when his permit was valid. The proof of deposit of taxes with regard to the bus, which found mention in the route permit, was also not shown. However, the proof of payment of taxes with regard to the new bus, which was to be added in the route permit in case it was renewed was shown, which according to me, is irrelevant. In view of the aforesaid, both - on the ground of delay, as also on merits, the petitioner has rightly not been granted renewal of his route permit and that his appeal has also been rightly dismissed by the Tribunal. Dismissed.

No costs.

( DEEPAK SIBAL ) JUDGE December 21, 2015 monika MONIKA 2015.12.23 14:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document