IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Review No.125 of 2011
IN
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1420 of 2010
IN
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 25 of 2010
WITH
Interlocutory Application No. 2887 of 2011
IN
Civil Review No. 125 of 2011
======================================================
Binod Choudhary, Son of late Suraj Narayan Choudhary, resident of
Sanskrit Bhawan, At and P.O.-Purnea, District-Purnea.
.... .... Appellant-Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar, Principal Secretary, Department of Transport,
Bihar, Patna.
2. The Chairman, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bihar, Patna.
3. The State Transport Authority, Bihar through Secretary,
Bisheshwaraiya Bhawan, Baily Road, Patna.
4. Sri Chandra Bhushan Sharma, son of Sri Ram Manohar Pandey,
Resident of Lichi Bagan, P.S.-Kazi Mohammandpur, District-
Muzaffarpur.
.... .... Respondents - Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate with
Mr. Dhirendra Nath Jha, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr. S.K. Ranjan, A.C. to SC-15
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
4. 27-06-2011 Interlocutory Application No. 2887 of 2011:
The delay of one month and 12 days occurred in
2 Patna High Court C. REV. No.125 of 2011 (4) dt.27-06-20112/2
filing the Civil Review Application is condoned.
Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.
Civil Review No. 125 of 2011:
This application for review of our order dated 1st
December 2010 made on above Letters Patent Appeal No.1420 of
2010 is filed by the appellant.
Learned Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha has
appeared for the appellant. He has submitted that though the entire
order is in favour of the appellant, the lines, “Further the
appellant cannot be granted permit with retrospective effect
from 2005. In view of passage of time the cause of action has
become infructuous”, are being interpreted by the respondent
authorities so as to refuse the renewal of transport permit in terms
of Section 81(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
aforesaid lines, though are not meant to circumscribe the powers
of the respondent authority to renew the permit in accordance with
Section 81(5) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, with a view to
removing doubt, are ordered to be deleted from our order dated 1st
December 2010.
The Review Application stands allowed in the above
terms. Our order dated 1st December 2010 will stand corrected to
the aforesaid extent.
(R.M. Doshit, CJ)
(Jyoti Saran, J)
Pawan/-