Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sureshchandra Jain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 February, 2018
1
Madhya Pradesh High Court
W.P.No.3839/2018
Suresh Chand Jain Vs. The State of M.P. and others
Gwalior Dated 16.02.2018
Shri M.S. Jadon, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Abhishek Mishra, learned Government Advocate for
the respondents/State.
With consent heard finally.
Present petitioner who is bus operator has preferred this petition seeking direction in respect of execution of counter signature over Reciprocal Transport Agreement by the State of Maharashtra.
Grievance as echoed by learned counsel for the petitioner is that on behalf of respondents a Reciprocal Transport Agreement between State of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra exists in respect of grant of State Carriage Temporary Permit. Petitioner preferred an application for temporary permit before the State of Madhya Pradesh which was duly signed and approved by the State but counter signature on behalf of State of Maharashtra has not been made and it is creating problem for the petitioner to the extent of violation of Fundamental Rights as enshrined under Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution of India as in absence of counter signature, petitioner could not ply his vehicle in the territory of Maharashtra. As per agreement dated 01-03- 2007 between the State of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, such denial on the part of respondent No.4 State of Maharashtra is illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed the order dated 31-01-2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 2465/2018 and seeks parity. According to him, petition can be disposed of with a direction to the State of Maharashtra as given into the said order.
Learned counsel for the respondents/State appearing on behalf of respondents has no objection to this proposition and submitted that duties/obligation of State of Madhya Pradesh 2 Madhya Pradesh High Court W.P.No.3839/2018 have been performed by the authorities working within the territory of State of Madhya Pradesh and it is turn of State of Maharashtra to comply their part of performance.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
From perusal of fact situation as well as petition memo, it appears that as per reciprocal agreement dated 01-03-2007 executed between the State of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, it is apparent that both the States would respect reciprocal agreement/temporary permit given for plying vehicles between two States. Here, in the present case, State of Madhya Pradesh and its appropriate authority (State Transport Authority) has issued temporary permit on 27-11-2017 for plying vehicle of petitioner for the period 01-12-2017 to 31-03-2018 from Sagar to Nagpur. In absence of counter signature from the State of Maharashtra petitioner is finding hard to ply vehicle between said destinations. Considering the fact situation, it further appears that it is procedural formality which has to be performed by State of Maharashtra, if petitioner comply all other terms and conditions as contained into reciprocal agreement as well as in granting temporary permit. Therefore, instead of pending the petition, this Court deems fit to dispose of this petition with the direction to State of Maharashtra to consider the case of petitioner as per terms and conditions of reciprocal agreement dated 01-03-2007 and if petitioner fulfills all the condition then counter signature be made immediately within 7 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order so that petitioner if fulfills all the conditions may ply the vehicle between two destinations as referred above and his right to pursue business/occupation as enshrined under Article 19 of Constitution of India would not be hindered in any manner.
As an interim arrangement, petitioner shall be allowed to ply his vehicle in accordance with the terms and conditions of 3 Madhya Pradesh High Court W.P.No.3839/2018 permit and the said vehicle shall not be stopped on the ground of non counter signature of State of Maharashtra over the temporary permit granted to the petitioner.
With the aforesaid, petition is disposed of.
(Anand Pathak)
LJ* Judge
Digitally signed by LOKENDRA JAIN
Date: 2018.02.20 16:51:09 +05'30'