r" ^ .»»< HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (2271 (PRt No. 6103 of2009 (^ PETITIONBR RESPONDENTS t^ P C-^T^) /3 3/ ^^/ O Kanker Roadways, Through the Managing Partner, Preetam Singh Garcha, s/o Late Jogendar Singh, aged about 62 years, R/o Civil Lines, Raipur(C.G). Vs. 1. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Raipur, (C.G). 2. State Transport Authority Chhattisgarh, New Bus Stand, Pandri, Raipur (C.G). 3. Wasan Singh, s/o Jogendar Singh, Pandri Bus Stand Raipur (C.G) through Power of Attorney Holder Ajay Singh S/o Late Satwant Singh Gill R/o Pandri Bus Stand Raipur(C.G). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA ^'% :.-J Appearance: Mr. D. K. Vishwakarma, Advocate, on behalfofMr. F.S.Khare, counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Smita Ghai, P.L. for respondents 1 85 2 on advance copy. ^ ORALORDER (05.01.2010) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. J Heard. The petitioner, which was respondent no.2, in Revision Petition No. 113/2008 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (STAT), Raipur, has filed this Petition against the order dated 16.3.2009 passed by the Tribunal whereby an application for condonation of delay filed by respondent no.3 herein was L. .u ^ . J »• ^/; W.PC227) PRNo.6103 of 2009 allowed by the Tribunal and the matter has been directed to be ) fixed for final hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Tribunal has allowed the application without assigning sufficient reasons for the same. It appears from the records of the writ petition that the impugned order against which the revision was filed before the STAT was passed on 29.03.2008 and the revision against the said order was filed on 09.07.2008. Respondent no.3 has taken the ground that he was having no knowledge about passing of such an order and as soon as it came to his knowledge, an application was filed for obtaining the certified copy of the same and after getting the certified copy on 25.06.2008, the revision was filed on 09.07.2008. It appears that the Tribunal has allowed the application for condonation of delay in filing the revision with a view to give complete justice to the parties by passing order on merits. I do not find any reason to interfere with the said order passed by the Tribunal. The petition has no merit. The same is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Sunil KumarSinha Judge Rao