_ AND,.;.{ V
.1…
IN THE mar: COURT 0? _
DATED THIS THE 16:11 DAfYWC)’F’JUNEi,’A _
BEFORE 1
THE HONBLE MR.JUsT1c@{RAM M*o HA:¥a Iéxgramr
WRIT pmnzog No; 1″52¥:>. /[2097 (Mv)
1 SR1? U YGGESH g – ”
S] O P3″. __UTH.AP.E’A :1′ .
AGED;’4G’_i’7EAR3:-3,» ”
BHAGIXVATRI CGLD
PRIVATE’1BUSfrSTAND,-
V:{RAJPET;.’vKQDAGi_I;”-..___ — ‘
% % _ V PETITIONER
(By Sri ; R “1.«:: 1<:..»«:s%H,_ Apvfi!' )
' ..:I5?I§iG£.(:C}'§}AL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY
" .__COOR{}7¥¥;ADEKERI, BY ITS SECRETARY. A
_ 2 ""'SRIv–.ivi WCHENGAPPA
sgo LATE M.K.PONNAPPA
AA _ CAUVERY nmenosmn CENTRE,
' 'VIRAJPET, KODAGU.
3″) ‘I;I~iE KSRTC
K.H.ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR,
BANGALORE 27,
BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.”
RESPONDEN’l’S’
A
{BV SMT. AKKAMAHABEVI; HCGP FOR R1
454
,1
91.) K
A’ remitted to the KS’I’AT for consideration afresh
-3.
the pennit renewing the same for a period of five yéffis
up to 13.6. 2009.
3. An examination of thcV.Un_:1er
that the Karnataka State fippofiaiéo
{KSI’A’I’) did neither C()I1Si<?i:f.'L3T?A_ the
explanation offemd by the delay in
pztfexring the without
adverting to tho the revision
petitioner, 'di1:i*;:: noais'9i$':1§_"f.iiefrevision petition as
not merits of the case. In
my opinion, " not considered the
'ofi'e:w¢d i§y"'tfia¢___pcfifioner to condone the delay in
petition, the order impugned is
uns1i£s?;§i§:1gebié.« «V . __ ' ' ' 'V
4. In result, this writ petiflon is allowed. The
5. 12.2006 Annextn-ne~E, is set-aside and the
M
-4-
Ln V’