Shailesh Gulhare Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:25568

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 3004 of 2026

¶6

1 - Shailesh Gulhare S/o Dashrath Gulhare Aged About 54 Years Bus Operator R/o Ward No. 32, Mannu Chowk Mungapara Bilaspur District Bilaspur C.G. ... Petitioner(s)

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary Department Of Transport Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - Secretary Regional Transport Authority Sector 27, Nava Raipur District Raipur C.G. ... Respondents

¶9

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶10

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner(s) :- Mr. B.L. Dembra, Advocate For State :- Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G.

¶11

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order On Board

23.06.2026

1. Heard.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to respondent No. 2/Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Durg, to consider and decide the petitioner’s application dated 02.03.2026 for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit on the route Bilaspur to Sariya via Pamgarh, Shivrinarayan and Sarangarh,

¶16

2

¶17

with one return trip daily, which according to the petitioner is pending consideration without any decision.

¶18

3. Facts of the case are that the petitioner is a bus operator and is operating his vehicle on the strength of permits granted by the State authorities. The petitioner submitted an application dated 02.03.2026 for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit on the aforesaid route. It is stated that despite repeated requests and reminders dated 03.06.2026, the said application has not been decided by the competent authority. It is further submitted that as per Rule 74(4) of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994, the competent authority is required to decide such application within 60 days, however, in the present case, the application has remained pending beyond the prescribed period.

¶19

4. Following reliefs have been prayed in this petition:-

¶20

“10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ of direction, directing the respondent no.02 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 02.03.2026, on the route Bilaspur to Sariya via Pamgarh, Shivrinarayan, Sarangarh, with one return trip daily, in accordance with law, within stipulated time.

¶21

10.2. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case mayalso be awarded to the petitioner including the cost and expenses of this petition.”

¶22

3

¶23

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application has been kept pending for an inordinate period without any justification, which is contrary to Rule 74(4) of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994. It is further submitted that similarly situated applicants have been granted timely consideration, whereas the petitioner has been deprived of his statutory right to consideration of his application. It is also submitted that non-decision of the application is arbitrary and affects the petitioner’s right to livelihood and business.

¶24

6. Learned State counsel submits that the application of the petitioner shall be considered and decided by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law and within a reasonable time, and that there is no deliberate inaction on the part of the authorities.

¶25

7. From the perusal of the pleadings and submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that the petitioner has submitted an application for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit which is admittedly pending before the competent authority since 02.03.2026. It is further noticed that Rule 74(4) of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1994 contemplates consideration and decision of such application within 60 days. However, despite lapse of considerable time, no decision has been taken on the petitioner’s application.

¶26

4

¶27

8. In view of the admitted factual position and the statement made by learned State counsel, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if a direction is issued to the competent authority to decide the petitioner’s application within a time-bound period.

¶28

9. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 2/Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Durg, to consider and decide the petitioner’s application dated 02.03.2026 for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit on the route Bilaspur to Sariya via Pamgarh, Shivrinarayan and Sarangarh, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

¶29

10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and all issues are left open to be decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.

¶30

11. No order as to costs.

¶31

sd/-

¶32

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶33

Vishakha

Shailesh Gulhare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shailesh Gulhare v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Urandabedha, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivram Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Biran Bai Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Priyanka Dhurv Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deenanath Jatvar Vs State of Chhattisgarh