Atif Qumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 July, 2023

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Atif Qumar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 July, 2023

Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu

                                      1


         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                          WPC No. 3142 of 2023

   •   Atif Qumar S/o Mohd. Shahabuddin Aged About 28 Years R/o
       Mominpura, Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

                                                              ---- Petitioner

                                  Versus

   1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Transport Department, Mantralaya,
      Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur,
      Chhattisgarh

   2. Commissioner, Surguja Division Ambikapur, District : Surguja
      (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

   3. Collector Ambikapur, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

   4. Regional Transport Authority, Surguja Ambikapur, District : Surguja
      (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

   5. Irshad Alam Bus Owner, Having Registration No. Jh 02 Ah 3165,
      Resident Of Millat Colony, Hazaribagh, District : Hazaribag,
      Jharkhand

                                                          ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. C.J.K. Rao, Advocate. For State : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 13/07/2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.5 is granted stage carriage permit to ply Bus bearing number JH02-AH- 3165 on the route Ranchi to Chirmiri, but respondent No.5 is plying bus in violation of the permit conditions. He submits that bus being plied by respondent No.5 is a Delux/Sleeper bus, whereas permit is granted only for ordinary bus and thereby respondent No.5 is causing loss to the public ex-chequer as he is not paying requisite tax to the respondent No.1. Petitioner submitted complaint in this regard to the respondent No.3, but till date no action has been taken. Hence, a direction be issued to respondent No.3 to take decision on 2 complaint/representation.

2. Learned State counsel submits that as the contention of the petitioner is that representation submitted by petitioner is still pending consideration if it is not yet considered and decided, it will be considered in accordance with law.

3. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record.

4. Considering the nature of grievance raised by the petitioner and also submission made by the respective parties, at this stage, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.4 to consider the complaint submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of order passed by this Court.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Nisha

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court