Sunanda Devi vs Regional Transport Authority on 9 March, 2010

J1-

should not cor11111e3n('e from Hampanakatia bus siigeixid

and having not done so, there is (:o1'1sidet"e1bl_<;?""fojjs;:e" Vi.'l'_','., ' 

the submission of Sri.B.R.S.GL1pta, learned-.c:(j';;f13§9:i._i'ur'"

the petitioner that embarking ()1'1V=.;1. (1OA1i1§,'§id€rE1$;iO!1'"Gii-iiihififi.'

applications by the Regi0néi1'...,T1*aiis;:ii)ri on

10.3.2010

is contrary to

In the resiiit. ‘the writ’Vpe’i:it:it>i1_3._éii?§*.eniowed in part.

The agenda at N(‘>._s.61–9: 1:0 ,A1jifhexure~B for the

111céet.ir1,§”i’ luOV.V3;’2O1O before the 15*
t”espoI1dAeni1’~are’the 3″” 1″espondcn1′. \2vere to

I’I1El1′{€’.’:_’..I”1fi1€T1’d1′.”._l:vE’/’}.”1f,v$’ to.”-t:h«’é:: applications deleting the route

“‘iQ cE'(>miii’:eric:e fr0niWHampa1′}akatte (State Bank). it is

‘open Af0r4″i..’rn1’£; V1:%i§}resp011cie1’1i to place the applications for

c>0z’1’:a~=..ideVr21ti(i’i1 in its future H]€Cf.iI’1g.

eéf ”

”