JUDGMENT :

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the writ petition may kindly be accepted and an appropriate writ, order or direction to be kindly issued declaring order Revenue/2022/391 dated 31-03-2022 (Ann.5) as non-es. void, illegal, without jurisdiction and against the principles of natural justice quashing the same. It is also prayed that by a suitable order or direction the respondents and/or any of their sub-ordinates be kindly restrained from interfering in the regular use of the said bus stand by the petitioner and other private operators.

Any other appropriate writ, order or direction which is deemed fit and proper may very kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

Costs may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that the petitioner holds a stage carriage permit bearing P.S.T.P. No. RJ-2021-SC-1014A valid upto 16th March, 2026, for Rajgarh - Dabri existing route. The Municipal Board, Rajgarh fixed Rs. 30/- as the fee for parking/entry of bus for picking up and dropping of passengers. Thereafter, the dispute arose between the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (RSRTC), Jaipur and Municipal Board, Rajgarh, regarding the recovery of the parking fees in question; whereafter, a civil suit was instituted by the RSRTC against the Municipal Board, and finally matter came up for consideration before this Hon’ble Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12539/2011 (RSRTC vs. Municipal Board, Rajgarh and Others, decided on 04.02.2013), it was observed thus:

“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

In this writ petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation is challenging validity of order dated 24.09.2011 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rajgarh whereby, in appeal filed by the Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Rajgarh, appellate court set aside the order passed by trial court, whereby, temporary injunction application was allowed by the trial court in favour of Corporation. It is very strange that in this case, two statutory bodies are contesting against each other for the purpose of levying parking charges by the Municipal Council.

It is very strange that litigation is going on between two statutory bodies for which the State authorities are required to take final decision after ascertaining the correct position in accordance with law. Such type of litigation should not be agitated in the Court by statutory bodies of State. Therefore, while dismissing the writ petition, it is ordered that entire matter may be placed before the Chief Secretary, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur for taking final decision and it is expected from the Chief Secretary to resolve the dispute and to issue proper instructions to the statutory authorities not to take recourse of judicial proceedings in such type of disputes.”

2.1 Thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Rajgarh addressed the impugned letter (Revenue/2022/391) dated 31.03.2022 to Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Rajgarh, stating therein that that the final decision is going to be taken by the higher authorities, till then, the Executive Officer was directed to ensure that only the buses of the Corporation should operate from the bus stand in question and no permission shall be granted to any private operators for operating its buses from the bus stand in question.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned letter dated 31.03.2022 is against the public interest, because the bus stand in question is being used for the welfare and convenience of the public at large, and now vide the impugned action, the private operators are not allowed to operate through the said bus stand, which is unjustified in law.

3.1. Learned counsel fu