Disposed

Satinder Pal Singh v. the State Transport Commissioner Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC6 Jan 2023CWP/51/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner sought a mandate directing the State Transport Commissioner to consider pending applications for Stage Carriage permits on specific routes, citing lack of response to legal notices.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 2 to consider pending legal notices and pass an appropriate order within one month.

Satinder Pal Singh Vs the State Transport… — Service and Employment | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

108

¶3

CWP No.51 of 2023 Date of decision: 06.01.2023

¶4

SATINDERPAL SINGH

¶5

...Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

THE STATE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER, PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH

¶10

Present: Mr. Raj Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

¶12

RAJ MOHAN SINGH , J.(ORAL)

¶13

Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.2 to consider and decide the applications dated 04.11.2019 and 17.02.2020 filed by the petitioner for grant of Stage Carriage permit on a route Dhuri to Barnala and Raikot to Sangrur in terms of Clause 3-E of the New Transport Scheme of 2018.

¶14

The grievance of the petitioner is that despite moving the aforesaid applications, needful in the context of taking final decision has not been done by the Competent Authority/respondent No.2 so far. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already served legal

¶15

POONAM BHATT 2023.01.06 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document, which is scanned copy of the original

¶16

CWP No.51 of 2023

¶17

-2-

¶18

notices dated 07.11.2020, 03.03.2022 and 12.12.2022 upon the Competent Authority and the same have not yielded any positive response.

¶19

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner would be satisfied in case his legal notices are directed to be considered by the Competent Authority in accordance with law within a specified period.

¶20

Notice of motion.

¶21

On the asking of the Court, Mr. R.S. Pandher, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶22

In view of the nature of prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to take note of pending legal notices got issued by the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶23

06.01.2023

¶24

P.Bhatt

¶25

(RAJ MOHAN SINGH) JUDGE

¶26

Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No

¶27

POONAM BHATT 2023.01.06 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document, which is scanned copy of the original

Satinder Pal Singh v. the State Transport Commissioner Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satinder Pal Singh v. the State Transport Commissioner Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramlal Vs State of Haryana and Others

M/S Raman Industries Vs Punjab State Cooperative Supply and Marketing Federation Ltd. Chandigarh & Ors.

Sanjay Pannu Vs State of Haryana and Others

Ravi Vs Haryana Staff Selection Commission

Sunil Vs State of Haryana and Another

Bal Krishan Saini Vs Regional Transport Authority Jalandhar through Its Secretary