COCP No.1553 of 2009 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.1553 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: August 28, 2009. Khanna Transport Company ...Petitioner(s) v. Shri R.Venkat Ratnam & Anr. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Shri Balvir Singh Giri, Advocate, for the petitioner. ORDER Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): As per the averments made in this petition, the application of the petitioner for grant of one regular stage carriage permit with one return trip for operating on Patiala-Ludhiana via Nandpur Kesho route was declined by the Regional Transport Authority, Patiala. However, the appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 7th October, 2008 ordered the grant of one permit with half return trip daily on the route in question in favour of the petitioner. The aforesaid order was not implemented by the respondents and no permit was issued to the petitioner. The petitioner filed CWP No.3586 of 2009 for issuance of directions which was disposed of vide order dated 6.3.2009 by this Court directing the respondents to implement the order dated 27.10.2008 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab provided that there was no legal impediment in COCP No.1553 of 2009 -: 2 :- implementation thereof and that the same has attained finality. It is the further case of the petitioner that in spite of the aforesaid orders dated 6.3.2009 passed by this Court, the respondents have failed to issue the permit in favour of the petitioner and, thus, are liable to be punished for contempt as defined under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the documents placed on record and the averments made in this petition. In the averments, the petitioner has submitted that he was granted permit by the Tribunal vide order dated 7.10.2008 whereas in CWP No.3586 of 2009, a direction has been given to implement the order dated 27.10.2008 passed by the Tribunal. Moreover, the order dated 6.3.2009 which is sought to be implemented by the petitioner, as attached with the writ petition, starts with the number of the writ petition as CWP No.2585 of 2009 whereas the 3rd page of the aforesaid order (Annexure P-1) talks of CWP No.3586 of 2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to explain these discrepancies. Not only this, even according to the petitioner, the respondents have filed a review application No.74 of 2009 before the Tribunal for reviewing its order and the same is pending. Thus, there is no cause of action available to the petitioner to file the present contempt petition as vide order dated 6.3.2009 a direction has been given to the Tribunal subject to the condition that the order of the Tribunal has attained finality and there was no legal impediment in implementation thereof. In the petition, there is no such averment made by the petitioner that the order of the Tribunal has attained finality and there was no legal implement in implementation COCP No.1553 of 2009 -: 3 :- thereof. Moreover, it is the petitioner's own case that review petition filed by the respondent is pending. Thus, in view of the aforesaid, I find no merit in this petition. Dismissed. August 28, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge