IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.14840 of 2006 (O&M)
Date of decision: 4th November, 2009
Yogesh Bus Service Registered
... Petitioner
Versus
State Transport Appellate Tribunal Punjab and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Present: Mr. Baldev Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Addl. AG Punjab
for the respondents.
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
Civil Misc. No. 17495 of 2009
Application is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Civil Writ Petition No. 14840 of 2006
Prayer of the petitioner for grant of Stage Carriage Permit on
Amritsar – Bathinda via Tarn Taran – Harike – Zira – Talwandi – Faridkot
– Jaito route was rejected by State Transport Commissioner on 18th
December, 1997. Copy of the order passed by State Transport
Commissioner is attached as Annexure P-3 with the present writ petition.
Thereafter, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was also dismissed by
the Presiding Officer, State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab,
Chandigarh on 28th March, 2005 vide order (Annexure P-4). Vide order
(Annexure P-4), 31 appeals were dismissed. One of the co-appellant, M/s
Civil Writ Petition No.14840 of 2006 (O&M) 2
Majhi Transport Co. (Regd.), Patiala had filed appeal No. 51 of 1999. The
orders dated 18th December, 1997 and 20th March, 2005 were assailed by
M/s Majhi Transport Co. by filing Civil Writ Petition No.10648 of 2006,
which was decided on May 7, 2009. In Civil Writ Petition No.10648 of
2006, the Court had passed the following order:
“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 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.
Civil Writ Petition No.14840 of 2006 (O&M) 3
Copy of order be given dasti on payment of usual
charges.”
Counsel for the petitioner prays that his writ petition be also
decided in the same terms as in Civil Writ Petition No.10648 of 2006 titled
as ‘Majhi Transport Co. v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and others‘
decided on 7th May, 2009, the order of which has been reproduced above.
I have heard counsel for the parties. I am of the view that
present writ petition can be disposed of in terms of order passed in Civil
Writ Petition No.10648 of 2006 titled as ‘Majhi Transport Co. v. State
Transport Appellate Tribunal and others‘ decided on 7th May, 2009.
Ordered accordingly.
[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
November 4, 2009
rps