IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.12673 of 2010 Date of Decision : August 16, 2010. Jatinder Pal Singh .....Petitioner versus State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.H.S.Sawhney, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vikas Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Baldev Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent No.3. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 6.4.2010 (Annexure P-2) passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, mainly on the ground that though he was a necessary and proper party, yet the impugned order has been passed without hearing him. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 fairly states that he has no objection if the impugned order is set-aside with a direction to the Appellate Tribunal to decide his appeal afresh after hearing the petitioner. In view of the afore-noticed stand taken by respondent No.3, the writ petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 6.4.2010 (Annexure C.W.P.No .12673 of 2010 2 P-2) is set-aside and the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab is directed to decide the appeal preferred by respondent No.3 afresh and in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be deemed to be a party to the said appeal and he may file his counter-reply, if any. The parties are directed to appear before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab on 17.9.2010. Meanwhile, status-quo, as it exists today, shall be maintained. Dasti. August 16, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE