L? IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT 'BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No£95fl2oos PETITIONER : I/PayalTraveIS Through - Managng Partner Swarup Chand Jain, S/o Ghisu Lal Chand Jain, Aged about - 55 years, Sadar Bazar, Durg, Distt. - Durg (C.G.) VERSUS Civil Line, Raipur (C.G.) Petitioner is notjoining other respondent as he is not claiming any relief from them. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA i : K1. RegionalTransport Authority D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ,2; Secretary RegionaiT‘ransport Authority Jagdalpur (C.G.) 3. Kanker Roadways %$v¢$ W Through — Managing Partner Preetam Singh Garcha XI—HC-78 1 9 ( mw,'m,W WW . 34‘; .F. .(C).wa . .6 9%;2‘00g ww<m>> mam ’ WWW WW§WW ésmm 211 {2007 Heard Shri Ajay Shrivastava, counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, G.A. for respondents No.1 and 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has questioned legality, propriety 9-1 1~2006 passed by the S.T.A.T., Raipur earned appeilate authority ailowing the appeai of respondent No.3 directed that temporary permit be granted to respondent No.3 herein. At the outset, Shri Agrawai a permit was granted has already e: this petition has become infructuou On theother hand, Shri 8hr the temporary permit has been e) orders contrary to the judgment ( Road Transport Corporation V. S in 2003 (2) M.P.H.T. 42 (CGt in wt can be granted only on satisfying c Clause (a) to (d) of Section 87 counsel for respondents No.1 and The argument advanced force, therefore, it is directed th orders for grant of temporary per circumstances mentioned in Claus The Writ petition is dispose M.(W,)P. No.4962/2006 ars Acting Chief Justice 1 _ and correctness of the order dated in appeal No.31i2006 whereby i rgued that the period for which temporary ‘cpired i on 31“ December 2006,'therefore, ivastava argued that even though term of {pired but R.T.A. and S.T.A. are passing if this Court in the matter of M.P. State State of- Chhattisgarh & others reported rich it has been held that temporary permit onditions and‘circumstances mentioned in h ich has not been disputed by learned L 9‘ 'leamed counsel for the petitioner has t in future, R.T.A. and S.T.A.T. to pass it only on satisfying specific and particular (a) to (d) of section 87. of accordingly. stands disposed of. Sd/- P.T.O. .