Dismissed

Bhagwati Devi v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC7 Nov 2017CW/19502/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held the petition to be administrative rather than legal. The Court dismissed the writ, directing the petitioner to submit a detailed representation with specific details of unauthorized bus plying to enable the Transport Commissioner to take action.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit detailed representation regarding unauthorized bus plying to the Transport Commissioner for action within three weeks.

Bhagwati Devi Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19502 / 2017

¶3

Bhagwati Devi W/o Shri Hanuman Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o- Village Rajas, Tehsil - Laxmangarh, District - Sikar (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Rajasthan Through Secretary Cum Transport Commissioner, Parivahan Bhawan, Sahakar Marg, Jaipur.

¶7

Managing Director, RSRTC, Parivahan Marg, Chomu House, Jaipur.

¶8

Regional Transport Authority, Sikar, Region, Sikar Through Secretary.

¶9

District Transport Officer, Sikar (Raj.)

¶10

Chief Manager RSRTC, Churu Depot. (Raj.)

¶11

----Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Satish Khandelwal

¶13

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶14

Order

¶15

08/11/2017

¶16

Fundamentally the petitioner is aggrieved of the unauthorized plying of the buses across the State of Rajasthan particularly on the Nawalgarh – Salasar via Laxmangarh route. His case is that as a permit holder under the Lok Parivahan Sewa Scheme on the Nawalgarh – Salasar via Laxmangarh route, the unauthorized plying of buses makes unviable his operations causing enormous economic loss. It has been submitted that despite representations to the Transport Commissioner, Jaipur on the issue, no requisite action has been taken. Hence this petition.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CW-19502/2017]

¶19

The issue agitated in this petition is not so much with regard to the contravention of Legal or Fundamental Rights of the petitioner or omission to exercise a statutory provision to the petitioner’s benefit. The petition actually is a cry for help by the petitioner allegedly being pushed law enforcement to the wall for reasons of lack of good governance and by the Transport Department and the jurisdictional Police. The issue is more administrative than legal in nature. Consequently, I am disinclined to interfere in this petition. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to make a detailed representation giving specifics of the unauthorized plying of buses on Nawalgarh – Salasar via Laxmangarh route or other route/s. In the event of the said representation being submitted to the Transport Commissioner, Jaipur with specifics of the Registration Number of Buses plying unauthorizedly and their area of operation, it is expected that requisite action will be taken within a period of three weeks from the receipt of such representation.

¶20

(ALOK SHARMA) J.

¶21

Bhagwati Devi v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagwati Devi v. State of Raj and 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

Abdul Wahid Vs Abdul Gaffar

Prem Prakash Vs Jitendra and Ors.

Ramesh Chand Sharma and Ors. Vs Smt Madhvi Ahluwalia and Ors.

Smt Rekha Devi Vs Sharwan Lal Saini andANR

Mukesh and Ors. Vs Nayab Tehsildar and Anr.

Mahaveer Prasad Sharma Vs Ram Phool Nagar and Ors.