Disposed

Baldev Raj & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jul 2012CWP/22721/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged Stage Carriage Mini Bus Permit holders for not plying routes according to their permitted alignments. The court, satisfied by a respondent's undertaking, directed the District Transport Officer to ensure routes are followed.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to District Transport Officer, Mohali to ensure permit holders ply as per route and take strict action against violations.

Baldev Raj & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Ors. — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

CWP No.22721 of 2011

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No.22721 of 2011 Date of decision: 06.07.2012

¶5

Baldev Raj and others

¶6

…..Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

State of Haryana and others

¶9

……Respondents

¶10

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr.Justice Jasbir Singh, Acting Chief Justice Hon’ble Mr.Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

¶11

Present: Mr.S.L.Chander Shekhar, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.Alok Jain, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for respondent Nos.2 to 6

¶12

Mr.Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Additional Advocate General, Haryana for respondent No.1 and 7 to 10 Mr.P.S.Bawa, Advocate respondent Nos.11 to 15

¶13

Jasbir Singh, Acting Chief Justice (Oral)

¶14

Respondent Nos.11 to 15 are the Stage Carriage Mini Bus Permit holders.

¶15

This writ petition has been filed with a grievance that they are not operating from starting point to terminus point as per route allotted to them. It is further stated that they ply their buses from Derabassi to Barwala and are not covering further route, therefore, a lot of inconvenience is being caused to the villagers.

¶16

Upon notice, separate replies have been filed by the respondents. However in all the replies filed it is stated that averments made by petitioners in the writ petition are not correct. Some of the villages, which the petitioners have mentioned, are not covered by the route

¶17

CWP No.22721 of 2011 2

¶18

permits. It is further stated that the above named respondents are plying their buses from starting to the terminus point as per route laid down in the permits valid upto 22.6.2014.

¶19

We have perused the route permits. As per the route permits, following route has been prescribed for plying the buses by respondent Nos.11 to 15:-

¶20

“Dera Bassi to Bhagsi via Saidpur, Kurranwala Adda, Bhagwas, Rampur Sainian Adda, Barwala Adda Bharaily (one permit with 6 RT's)'

¶21

Mr.Bawa who has put in appearance on behalf of respondent Nos.11 to 15, gives an undertaking that respondents No.11 to 15 shall ply their buses as per the route given in the Stage Carriage Mini Bus Permits held by them.

¶22

In view of the statement made by Mr.Bawa, the grievance raised by the petitioners stands addressed. Accordingly, we dispose of this writ petition by issuing directions to the District Transport Officer, Mohali to ensure that the Stage Carriage Mini Bus Permits Holders shall ply their buses as per route detailed in their respective permits and if anybody is not plying on the route allotted, strict action be taken against the said permit holder.

¶23

(Jasbir Singh) Acting Chief Justice

¶24

06.07.2012 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) gk Judge

Baldev Raj & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baldev Raj & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pardeep @ Kala Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Phool Chand Vs Union of India and Others

Nav Jiwan Kusht Ashram and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Mohd. Rashiq & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sukhjinder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Amar Nath Vs Union of India & Ors.