. 1 BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (227) No. / 3£ ? /2009 I Basant Kumar Gupta, S/o.‘ Late Kapil PraSad Gupta, Aged about 4§Afyears, R/o. Villags Tapkara, District V Jashpur (C.GV). /, VERSUS 1. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Chhattisgarh, Raipur. 2. Ghanshyam Rathod, " cmh S/o. Gangaram Rathod, R/o. BuS'Stand, Bilaspur (C.G.) 'The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bilaspur. The Regional Transport Authority, Bilaspur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / ,L u S HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (227! No. 1369 of2009 PETITIONER > : Basant Kumar Gupta VERSUS RESPONDENTS State .Transport Appellate Tribunai, Chhattisgarh & others WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE V227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon’ble Mr. N.K. Agarwal, J4 Pi‘esent : Shn' Santosh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 02.02.201 l) 1. The instant petition is directed against the order dated 02,08,2008, passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘STAT’) in Revision Case No.~132/07, whereby the petitioner’s revision has been dismissed. 2. The only contention raised by Shri Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that without formulating the route under Section 68(3)(ca) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘MV Act’) permit has been granted to respondent No. 2’ which is illegal and the said permit deserves to be quashed. However, he fails to substantiate his contention by filing the route formulated by the State of Chhattisgarh under'VSection 68(3)(ca) of MV Act which was published in the otiicial gazette on 14.06.2004. uts'J Th6 competent authority has held in order impugnod that route has already been formulated and the same has been published in official gazette on 14.06.2004. In View of abovo, I do not fmd any merit in the petition warranting interference of this court under Article 227* of the Constitution of India. It is well settled principle of law that this Couit, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, should refrain itself from interfering with the order passed by the Court below, except in such cases where perversity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error is writ large on the face of the record, which is not in the present case. The petition being devoid of substance is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs. /// I Sd/ me Agrawa‘i Judge Sahu