HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.18066 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.11.2011 **** The Jassaur Kheri Hans Cooperative Transport Society Ltd. . . . . Petitioner VS. Transport Commissioner, Haryana & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Lekh Raj Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ravi Dutt Sharma, DAG Haryana ***** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner-Society is aggrieved by the order dated 20.06.2011 (Annexure P4) passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Jhajjar whereby its application for variation in the conditions of ‘route permit’ has been declined. (2). In the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner (CWP No.3782 of 2011), this Court vide order dated 31.03.2011 directed the Regional Transport Authority, Jhajjar to consider the petitioner-Society’s claim for thegrant of temporary permit within the paramaters of Section 99(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. CWP No.18066 of 2011.doc - 2 – (3). In purported compliance to those directions, the Regional Transport Authority, Jhajjar has passed the impugned order dated 26.06.2011 (Annexure P4) primarily on the plea that a new transport policy has been notified hence such like claims are required to be considered in terms thereof. This is axiomatic from the following part of the impugned order:- “Hence, there is no justification for giving permit to the applicant against the Scheme. Hence, the application of the applicant is in contravention of Section 100 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1988 because the notification of the new transport policy was published on 3.05.2011. Hence, on the publication of the new transport policy, there is no justification for considering the application of the applicant. So far as the question of absence of one member on account of sickness is concerned, if one member is absent on account of sickness, the meeting of the RTA can be held under Rule 68(2) of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1988. Hence, finding no force in the arguments of the counsel for the applicant, the application of the Society is dismissed. If the applicant so desires, it can renew its permit on the original route as per rules.” CWP No.18066 of 2011.doc - 3 – (4). Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that the Regional Transport Authority has made an attempt to misdirect and mislead the whole issue. I say so for the reason that the applications made by other Societies like the Chandu Cooperative Transport Society Ltd. with similar prayers have been considered on merits and permissible variations by way of temporary permission has been granted on 29th August, 2011 (Annexure P3) without any reference to the new Transport Policy which is otherwise stated to be sub judice before this Court. (5). Suffice it to mention here that instead of granting a new route permit, the petitioner-Society’s claim also for variation of the existing route permit by way of temporary permission could be considered. (6). For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned decision dated 20.06.2011 (Annexure P4) is hereby quashed with a direction to the Regional Transport Authority, Jhajjar to implement the directions issued by this Court on 31st March, 2011 in its true letter and spirit and keeping in view the observations made hereinabove. (7). The needful shall be done within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (8). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. CWP No.18066 of 2011.doc - 4 – 21.11.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge