Bombay High Court
Zakir Hussain Yusufali vs State Of Maharashtra, Through Its ... on 1 July, 2017
Author: Vasanti A Naik
Bench: Vasanti A Naik
WP 818-13 & Bunch 1 Common Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 818/2013
Dinesh S/o Janraoji Bhonde,
Aged about 33 years, Occu: Educated Umemployed,
R/o Meharabpura, Achalpur City,
Distt. Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5257/2012
Zakir Hussain Yusufali,
Aged about 67 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Mohmedali Road, Akola-444 001. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 :::
WP 818-13 & Bunch 2 Common Judgment
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5258/2012
Durgashankar Ghanshyam Agrawal,
Aged about 40 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Paratwada, Tq.Achalpur,
Distt. Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5259/2012
Shamsuddin Yusuf Ali,
Aged about 60 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Mohmedali Road, Akola-440 001. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 :::
WP 818-13 & Bunch 3 Common Judgment
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5261/2012
Seema W/o Kamalkant Ladole,
Aged about 45 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Ladole Bhavan, Near Rest House,
Tah. Anjangaon Surji, Distt. Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5262/2012
Durgashankar Ghanshyam Agrawal,
Aged about 40 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Paratwada, Tq.Achalpur,
Distt. Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 :::
WP 818-13 & Bunch 4 Common Judgment
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5267/2012
Durgashankar Ghanshyam Agrawal,
Aged about 40 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Paratwada, Tq.Achalpur,
Distt. Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh . RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION No. 5268/2012
Rajendra S/o Mahadeorao Godhankar,
Aged about 55 years, Occu: Business,
R/o Namuna Galli, Amravati. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. State Transport Authority,
Maharashtra State, Administrative Building,
Dr.Ambedkar Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
3. Transport Commissioner,
Administrative Building, Dr.Ambedkar
Udyan, Government Colony,
Bandra (East), Mumbai - 400 051.
4. State Transport Authority,
through its Secretary,
Motimahal, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh. RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 :::
WP 818-13 & Bunch 5 Common Judgment
Shri R.L. Khapre, counsel for the petitioner in all the writ petitions.
Mrs. M.Naik, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State in all the writ
petitions.
CORAM :SMT.VASANTI A NAIK AND
A.D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATE : 1
ST
JULY, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A NAIK, J.)
Since the issue involved in these writ petitions is identical and similar orders of the Transport Commissioner and the State Transport Appellate Authority are challenged therein, they are heard together and are decided by this common judgment.
2. Shri Khapre, the learned counsel for the petitioners, states that similar order passed by the Transport Commissioner, as are passed in these cases and the common order of the State Transport Authority, was challenged by M/s Chawla Transport Company in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013 and this Court has, by an order dated 13.08.2013, allowed the said writ petition and after setting aside the orders passed by the Transport Commissioner and the State Transport Appellate Authority, remanded the matter to the Transport Commissioner for passing a fresh order in accordance with law. It is stated that M/s Chawla Transport Company, the petitioner in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013 and the present petitioners were the appellants before the State Transport Appellate Authority and the State Transport Appellate Authority has passed a common order in ::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 ::: WP 818-13 & Bunch 6 Common Judgment the cases of the petitioners and M/s Chawla Transport Company. It is stated that in view of the aforesaid, it would be necessary to allow these petitions on parity and remand the same to the Transport Commissioner for a fresh decision on merits.
3. We had called for Writ Petition No.663 of 2013 and perused the same. On a perusal of the same, we find that the issue involved in these cases and in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013 decided on 13.08.2013 is not only similar but, the common order that governs the appeal of the petitioner in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013 also governs the appeals of the petitioners herein. It would be necessary, as submitted on behalf of the petitioners, to pass a similar order, on parity.
4. Hence, for the reasons stated hereinabove and also for the reasons recorded in the order, dated 13.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013, the writ petitions are partly allowed. The impugned orders of the Transport Commissioner and the State Transport Appellate Authority are hereby quashed and set aside. The matters are remanded to the Transport Commissioner for deciding the same in accordance with law after considering the observations made by this Court in the order, dated 13.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.663 of 2013.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 06/07/2017 00:32:57 :::