IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1949 of 2008 (M/S) Sanyukt Rotation Yatayat Vyavastha Samiti Chandreshear Marg, Rishikesh......... Petitioner Versus Sri Shanti Prasad Nautiyal ............ Respondent And Writ Petition No. 1950 of 2008 (M/S) Sanyukt Rotation Yatayat Vyavastha Samiti Chandreshear Marg, Rishikesh......... Petitioner Versus Sushil Kumar Babbar ............ Respondent ...... Mr. Gopal Narain, Advocate for the petitioner. Hon’ble V.K. Gupta, C.J. Since the issue involved is common in both the cases, both the petitions are being disposed of together by this common order. In these petitions, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the District Judge, Dehradun granting ad interim injunction in favour of the respondents and against the petitioner restraining the petitioner from interfering in any manner in the plying of the buses in question. The petitioner has not been able to show to this Court as to how and in what manner was the petitioner entitled to challenge the plying of the buses by the respondents and as to what authority the petitioner had to prevent the respondents from plying the buses. The respondents were in possession of the buses, which were duly registered and had also Route permits duly and validly granted to them in terms of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In my considered opinion, the learned District Judge was justified in granting the injunction. No interference is called for. Both the petitions are dismissed in limine. (V.K. Gupta, C. J.) 04.11.2008 A