IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.18687 of 2009 BINOD RAM Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the Petitioner: Mr. A.K.Choudhary & Mr. N. Kumar, Advocates For Respondent no.12: Mr. K.N.Choubey,Sr.Advocate M/s.G.S.Singh, A.K.Singh-1 & Anirudh Kr.Singh,Advocates For Respondent no.13:Mr. R.K.Singh, Advocate For the State: Mr. A.K.Dubey,AC to AAG-9 ----------- 3 18.1.2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Based on earlier direction of this Court dated 18.11.2009 in CWJC No. 15759 of 2009 contained in annexure- 12, annexure-13 has came to be issued by the North Bihar Regional Transport Authority. The decision render does not satisfy the petitioner and he rushed to the High Court challenging the said decision in the present writ application. He has many a submissions to make with regard to validity or otherwise of such order. Learned Senior counsel representing the private respondent no.12 in whose favour the impugned order has accrued, meets the submissions made at the bar by learned counsel for the petitioner but raises a basic preliminary question with regard to maintainability of this writ application at this stage. He submits that the petitioner has not exhausted the statutory remedy of revision which is available under section 90 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. He submits that after all the origin of the present dispute is also an earlier order passed by the appellate tribunal. - 2 - The Court refused to record any opinion on the weightiness of the submission made against the impugned order for the simple reason that the Court wants the statutory forum to get into the nitty-gritty of the matter and decide the issue first before the jurisdiction of the High Court is invoked. Petitioner will be well advised to file revision before the State Transport Appellate Authority against the impugned order if he still feels that he has a case. This writ application stands dismissed with the above liberty. RPS (Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)