MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU
Ashok Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
ORDER :
MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.
1. This common order shall dispose off above twelve writ petitions being identical on facts and law.
2. Petitioners are the existing stage carriage permit holders in terms of an approved Scheme, notified by the State of Haryana under Section 100 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short ‘the Act’) and plying their buses on the routes in question. In nutshell, their grievance is that private respondents have also been granted/issued the impugned temporary permits on those very routes, but illegally, therefore, the same are liable to be set aside by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
3. For brevity, the facts have been noticed from CWP No.7928 of 2020 and prayer clause in nutshell would be as under:-
(ii) to stay the operation of the impugned permits and further restrained official respondents from issuing any timetable to operate buses on the routes in question and
(
A.Shanmugam Vs. Ariya Kshatriya Rajakula Vamsathu Madalaya Nandhavana Paripalanai Sangam
South Eastern Coalfields Limited Vs. State of M.P. and others
Ram Krishna Verma and others Vs. State of UP and others
Gajraj Singh etc. vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal
UP State Roadways Transport Corpn.
Pancham Chand and others Vs. State of HP and others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.