Subrata Maji v. State Of West Bengal And ORS.

S/L. 4.

August 4, 2022.

MNS.

WPA No. 12921 of 2022 Sri Subrata Maji Vs.

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Dilip Kumar Samanta, Mr. Abhishek Banerjee ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Srijan Nayak, Mrs. Rituparna Maitra ...for the State-respondent.

Affidavit-of-service filed in Court today be kept on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has sought diversion of the original route on which the petitioner was plying his vehicle, due to subsequent closure of a coal mine on the original route, which has robbed the said route of its commercial viability.

It is submitted that Annexure- P/2 at page 14 of the writ petition is a copy of the said application for diversion.

Learned counsel for the respondentauthorities submits that the rigours and provisions of Section 80 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (1988 Act) are applicable to the present case.

It is seen from Annexure- P/2 at page 14 of the writ petition that the application itself has been made, according to the petitioner, in accordance with the provisions of Sections 69, 70 and 80 of the 1988 Act.

Since the petitioner seeks to invoke the said provisions, there cannot be any qualms on the proposition raised by learned counsel for the respondents.

Hence, WPA No. 12921 of 2022 is disposed of by directing the Regional Transport Authority, Paschim Bardhaman, that is, the respondent no. 2 herein, to dispose of the petitioner's application for diversion, which is annexed at page 14 (Annexure- P/2) of the writ petition, upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if required, and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight weeks from date.

There will be no order as to costs.

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities.

(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)