Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

ANMOL BUS SERVICE versus STATE OF RAJ AND ANR

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


ANMOL BUS SERVICE v STATE OF RAJ AND ANR - CW Case No. 5138 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 3619 (27 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

ORDER

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 5138/2007

ANMOL BUS SERVICE Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR.

DATE: 27.07.2007.

HON'BLE MR. K.S. RATHORE, J.

Mr. Amit Kuri for the petitioner.

Mr. B.S. Chhaba, Addl. GA for the State.

Mr. K.C. Sharma for the caveator-respondent No.2

****

This writ petition is directed against the order dated 05.07.2007 passed by the respondent No.2, the Member, Regional Transport Authority, Sikar Region,

Sikar as also against the advertisement/notification dated 10.07.2007 by which applications are invited for grant of permit against the vacancies for Pilani to

Chandigarh via Luharu interstate route.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without deciding the application of the petitioner dated 02.05.2007 for grant of permit over the route

Pilani to Chandigarh via Luharu, the respondents cannot notify calling applications to grant permit on the said route.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that when the application was submitted by the petitioner on 02.05.2007, there was no vacancy on the route in question and further submits that pursuant to the notification, the petitioner can also apply.

Having considered the rival submissions of the respective parties and after going through the impugned order dated 05.07.2007 passed by the respondent No.2, the Member, Regional Transport Authority, Sikar as also the notification/advertisement dated 10.07.2007, I find no illegality in the order impugned and the respondents have rightly issued advertisement/notification inviting applications for grant of permit over Pilani to

Chandigarh interstate route. The petitioner has no locus to challenge the same.

Accordingly, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed and the same is hereby dismissed.

(K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/


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.