Majhi Transport Co vs The State Transport Appellate … on 7 May, 2009

C.W.P NO. 10648 OF 2006                              -1-



   IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                 CHANDIGARH


                               C.W.P NO. 10648 OF 2006
                               DECIDED ON : 07.05.2009


Majhi Transport Co.
                                          ...Petitioner
          versus

The State Transport Appellate Tribunal
and others
                                      ...Respondents



CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT


Present : Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate,
          for the petitioner.

          Mr. G. S. Attariwala, Additional AG, Punjab.


SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner-a private transport company, seeks

quashing of the orders dated 18.12.1997 (Annexure P-4) and

28.03.2005 (Annexure P-5), whereby its application for grant of

one regular stage carriage permit on Pathankot-Moga route via

Amritsar, Tarn-Taran, Makhu has been rejected. The petitioner

also seeks a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to grant permit

on the above stated route.

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the controversy involved in this case has

been squarely answered in the petitioner’s favour by a Division
C.W.P NO. 10648 OF 2006 -2-

Bench of this Court vide judgment dated July 13, 2006 passed

in C.W.P No. 3613 of 205 (Majhi Motors (Regd.), Patiala

vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and others).

Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some

length and keeping the above noticed stand taken on behalf of

the petitioner, however, without expressing any views on the

merits of petitioner’s claim, this writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the petitioner’s

claim in the light of the judgment dated July 13, 2006, rendered

by this Court in Majhi Motor’s case (supra)within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this

order and in case the petitioner is found entitled for the grant of

stage carrier permit, as per the said judgment, the same shall be

granted within the above stated stipulated period. In case

respondents No.2 and 3 are of the view that the judgment in

Majhi Motor’s case (supra) is distinguishable or is not

attracted to the facts of the present case, in that event, the

petitioner’s claim shall be disposed of by passing a reasoned

order.

Copy of order be given dasti on payment of usual

charges.

MAY 07, 2009                                 (SURYA KANT)
shalini                                          JUDGE
 C.W.P NO. 10648 OF 2006   -3-