Dismissed

Naresh Murmu And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Jharkhand HC2 Apr 2024WPC/5157/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal that allowed an appeal against the grant of a permanent inter-state transport permit. The court held the petition unmaintainable because the impugned order directed reconsideration of the application, and no final order resulting from that reconsideration had been placed on record to show prejud

What the court decided

AI extract

Naresh Murmu And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W. P. (C) No. 5157 of 2008

¶3

¶4

Naresh Murmu

¶5

Lalchand Maraya

¶6

Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Jharkhand through Secretary Department of Transport, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶9

The State Transport Commissioner, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶10

The State Transport Authority, Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶11

State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Jharkhand, Ranchi

¶12

Mahesh Kumar Narnoli … …. Respondents -----

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶14

----For the Petitioners : Ms. Vani Kumari, Advocate For the State : Ms Rukmuni Kumari, A.C to S.C. Mines-III -----

¶15

Oral Order

¶16

14 / Dated : 02.04.2024

¶17

The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 08.09.2008 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Jharkhand, Ranchi in Transport Appeal No. 08 of 2006.

¶18

The petitioners were granted inter-state permit vide order dated 25/26.09.2006 from Godda to Kolkata via Dumka, Suri, Panagarh against which respondent no. 5 preferred an appeal before the State Transport Appellate Tribunal which was allowed and being aggrieved by the order, the instant writ petition has been filed.

¶19

On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the matter pertains to grant of permanent permit and the private respondent had filed appeal on the ground that he was given temporary permit with effect from 07.09.2004 to 07.02.2007. Learned Tribunal after discussing at length allowed the appeal on the ground that the document, which was filed by the appellant was not duly considered while rejecting the application for permanent permit.

¶20

The order has been assailed on the ground that the application of the petitioners was not considered by the authority concerned.

¶21

From the impugned order itself, it is apparent that there was a direction to reconsider the application along with requisite documents for permit of Appellants and respondent nos. 2 and 3. The final order after reconsideration of such application has not been brought on record to show as to how the Petitioners are aggrieved.

¶22

Under the circumstance, this Court is of the view that the writ petition is not maintainable and is accordingly, dismissed.

¶23

Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

¶24

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶25

AKT/Satendra

Naresh Murmu And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Naresh Murmu And Anr. v. State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mathur Saha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sukra Dehri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shamsher Ansari Vs State of Jharkhand

Balram Sahu And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.