Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shyama Prosad Mukherjee vs State on 23 December, 2011
Author: Debasish Kar Gupta
Bench: Debasish Kar Gupta
1
8 23.12.11 W.P.21748(W)of 2011
sn
SHYAMA PROSAD MUKHERJEE VS. STATE
& ORS.
Mr. Rameswar Bhattacharya
Mr. R.U. Bhattacharya
Mr. Soumen Bhattacharya
..for the petitioner
Mr. Chittaranjan Ghosh
..for the State
Let the affidavit of service be kept on record.
This writ application is filed by the petitioner on the
ground of non acceptance of his application for granting the Stage
Carriage Permit in his favour for plying his vehicle (Bus) on the
Route no.93/93A from Kharibari to Bagbagar, District Calcutta.
It is submitted by the learned State Advocate, on
instruction, that the maximum fleet strength on the route in
question is limited to 20 by virtue of the notification issued under
the provisions of Clause (a) sub-section (3) of Section 71 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. According to him, there is no vacancy
in respect of the route in question.
Let the affidavit in opposition be filed within three
weeks after re-opening of Court after X-mas vacation; reply
thereto, if any, be filed within one week thereafter.
Liberty is given to the parties to mention the matter
for early hearing before the appropriate bench after expiry of the
2
aforesaid period.
Upon prima facie consideration made on behalf of the
State respondents that there is no vacancy in respect of the route in
question, the balance of convenience and/or inconvenience is in favour of restraining the respondents from granting further permit on the route in question.
The respondent no.2 is restrained from granting any permit in respect of the route in question without the leave of the Court during the pendency of this writ application.
(Debasish Kar Gupta,J) 3 4