e'F,^/_ CD IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARfi AT'^BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No .•^-"^<^4-/2005 PETITIONEe^^...*'^.ft~-v'" ' Manohar Shrivas, ^2^*v^><>4*' ^^V-^^' ^ Nar^v^n '^hri ^^M<btK^^ <es2-- A S/o. Shri -^?A*Sb^*"''..^ Narayan 'Shrivas, 'f.-:<f\^y''" ^***'*" ,.^;v¥-'o'<..-*****" Rajatalab, Raipur, (C.G.) ^fy R/o. '<^' ^(^ RESPONDENTS VERSUS f ^>^ 1 Regional Trarisport Authority, Chhattisgarh at Raipur. fL-2. Pawan Kumar Yadav, S/o. Ram Kumar Yadav^'R/o.410 Sundar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3. State of Chhattisgarh, Thirough the. Secretary, Transport D&partment, D.K.S Bhawan Raipur. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA r; XI-HC-78 ^rpTeCT^m^ vj-cq '«i«ic)«, u>-at<d<i<?, [6trti<<iy<< .t^.^....rf.7?.?/o/.c., 3TT^5T q^P (<?crf^6[^) ^200 OT^^T^rR^ich ^TT^^TSRte ^RITW^rf^TW^^T <pi<iio<i1Ti ^i^oT^'fe^ xRfl^i^ ^3Tf^T3TT^$T 06.10.2005 Shri B,K. Rawat, coun^l Shri R.R. Sinha, Panel Shri Santosh Yadu, cour Heard, The petitioner has prel 226 of the Constitution of Ir and correctness of the orc Regional Transport Au'tiiori't carriage permit has been gran The main grievance of permit granted in favour of the petitioner's permit i.e. pel Durg is 11.35 a.m., whereas No.2's permit from Durg is 11. respect of this fact, but the without applying the mind permit in fayour of responden' Argument advanced b} cannot be sdd to be without being granted with such a nar then R.T.A. was required to for the petitioner. Ldp/er for respondent Nos.l & 3. |sel for respondent No.2. |erred this writ petition under Articte |dia questioning the legality, propriety \er dated 30.3.2005 passed by the ^ Raipur whereby a regular stage fed to respondent No.2. tijie petitioner herein is that the time of r^spondent No,2 is two minutes ahead of Jitioner's permst departure timing from the departure timing of respondent p3 a.m. and objection was dlso raised m t,T,A. wi1+iout assi9nin9 any reason and p(assed the order regarding grant 'of No.2. learned counsel for the petitioner any substance, when the permit was ^ow gap of timing between two permits c^ssign reasons as to why the permit is w^- <dtyq«ttl«|'K»)^ti(Tn'<1*l<S,|6|<ftl^y^ ^PTc^T^^TT^ W^ 200 -9^ 3ff^$Tq?Tf^::lt<P ^T8ff3?T^^Tw*li<P Roshan/- 3H^$Tq^P ((ifli^N<E{) S^RTTSR^rf^T OT^^T being granted with such a sehedule js dwoys in the int^ the entire route between "ti faci}itat€?^the travellers, bu-| impu9ned order that whether| It is therefore, neces^ matter again and pass the ^ Accordingiy, the order impuj <pi<iIo<TITi+ii^ol'^'I^l-<Sl ^FJI^I^ ^erf^ran^^T short interval, as the fixing of time srest of tmveling pubiic in relation to ^o termini and timings are given to the RTA has not mentioned in the looking to number of passengers, for their corivenience the permif is being granted with such a short interval. ^ ary that the RTA should consider the rder after hearing both the parties, ^ned dated 30.3.2005 passed by the R.T.A., Raipur is quashed and ^r\e matter is remitted back to the RTA to pass order after hearing t|oth the parties and assign reasons for the time scheduled fixed by t|ie RTA. However, it is made ciear that the permit granted to respon<|ent No.2 shall continue tilt the disposal of the application of respond^nt No.2 regarding grant of permit. With the direction afor) Consequently, M.(W.)11 also stand disposed of. Certified copy as per n •esaid, the petition stands disposed of, No.2236/05 <& I.A. No.5382/05 ittes. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge ^ SP/FS/2005-20,000 ^ . ^ .'< ^ < ^