Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BALJIT SINGH & ANR. versus STATE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Baljit Singh & Anr. v. State Transport Commissioner, Punjab - CWP-2892-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 5955 (25 August 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Civil Writ Petition No. 2892 of 2005.

Baljit Singh and another.

... Petitioners

Versus

State Transport Commissioner, Punjab

and others. .. Respondents

CORAM : Hon`ble Mr. Justice Jasbir Singh,
Hon`ble Mr. Justice Pritam Pal.

Present : Shri H.S.Sawhney, Senior Advocate, with Shri Rajinder Sharma, Advocate,

for the petitioners.

Shri P.S.Chhinna, Addl. A.G. Punjab,

for the respondent-State.

Shri Baldev Kapoor, Advocate,

for respondent No.3.

JASBIR SINGH, J. (Oral)

Vide order dated 26.12.1995 (Annexure P/1), a Stage Carriage Permit, to ply bus on Dhuri - Samana route was granted in favour of one Bhupinder Singh. The said order was challenged by respondent No.3 before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Punjab, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal"). The said Bhupinder Singh was proceeded ex-parte, appeal was allowed vide order dated 9.11.2004 (Annexure P/4) and directions were issued to Regional Transport Authority to issue a permit in favour of respondent No.3, within three months of receipt of a certified copy of the order, referred to above. Petitioners, who are transferees from Bhupinder Singh, have filed this writ petition. It is their case that under a valid order, the permit in question was transferred in their name on 22.2.2003. As they were not impleaded as a party, so they could not present their case. Bhupinder Singh, definitely, after the transfer, was not interested, as such he failed to appear before the Tribunal.

Before this Court, it has been said by counsel for both the parties that against the grant of stage carriage permit to Bhupinder Singh, no other applicant except respondent No.3, had preferred an appeal.

Shri Baldev Kapoor, counsel for respondent No.3, has made a statement before this Court that he has no objection in case permit granted to Bhupinder Singh, which has now been cancelled by the Tribunal, is regularised in favour of the petitioners and the order passed by the Tribunal be set-aside.

Shri Chhinna, counsel for the respondent-State has failed to show anything as to why the prayer made be not granted.

In view of the prayer made by counsel for respondent No.3, this writ petition is allowed and the order dated 9.11.2004 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Tribunal, is set-aside and the stage carriage permit, granted in favour of Bhupinder Singh, vide order Annexure P/1 and transferred in favour of the petitioners, is ordered to be regularised in favour of the petitioners.

[ JASBIR SINGH ]

JUDGE

[ PRITAM PAL ]

Aug. 11, 2006 JUDGE

som


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.