2026:CGHC:7866 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 569 of 2026 Habib Bhai S/o Late Ahmad Bhai Aged About 60 Years Bus Operator R/o Chauhan Gali, Shitlapara Kanker Distt- Kanker (C.G.)

... Petitioner versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary Transport Department Indravati Bhawan Mantralaya New Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Regional Transport Authority Raipur Distt- Raipur (C.G.)

3 - Gappu Mahendra Travels Private Limited Through- It Director Ajay Singh Gill S/o Late Satvant Singh Gill R/o Mahendra Travels Bus Stand Pandri Raipur Distt-

Raipur (C.G.)

... Respondents {Cause tittle, as taken from Case Information System} For Petitioner : Mr. B.L. Dembra, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Shashank Mehta, Panel Lawyer For Resp,No. 3/ Caveator : Mr. Virendra Verma, Advocate Mr. S. Prakash, Transport Commissioner, State Transport Appellate Tribunal appears through Video Conferencing.

{Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi}

Order on Board

12/02/2026

1. Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :-

“10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or direction, calling for the records from the concerned authorities for its kind perusal.

10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ or direction, quashing/ set-aside the order dated 14.01.2026 in revision no. 29/2025 by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal Raipur and consequently revision preferred by the respondent No. 3 be dismissed by affirming the order dated 11.03.2024 passed by the RTA Raipur (C.G.)

Or in alternate the STAT Raipur be directed to rehear the matter after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to allow the petitioner to ply his vehicle as per order dated

11.02.2024 passed by the RTA.

10.4 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost and expenses of this petition.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that vide order dated 11.03.2024, respondent No. 2- Regional Transport Authority, Raipur (for brevity, “RTA”) has issued permit in favour of petitioner herein, which was challenged by the respondent No. 3 before State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Chattisgarh, Raipur (for brevity, “STAT”) bearing Revision No. 29/2025. He further submits that without affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, ‘STAT’ has passed the impugned order (Annexure P-1) dated 14.01.2026 declaring him to be ex parte whereas no formal order has been passed in this regard. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition may be disposed of directing ‘STAT’ to reconsider the issue after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 on caveat, appears on advance copy, would submit that since the petitioner had not fulfilled all the coloums of application filed before Regional Transport Authority, Raipur and necessary documents pertaining to the vehicle owned by him, therefore, learned ‘STAT’ has remitted the matter back to the ‘RTA’ to pass order afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to the parties. He further submits that earlier the petitioner was represented by his counsel, but thereafter he remained absent. In such a situation, ‘STAT’ has declared him ex parte while passing the impugned order, hence, prayer made by the petitioner may not be allowed.

4. Per contra, counsel for the respondents No. 1 & 2/ State would submit that the impugned order passed by learned ‘STAT’ is well reasoned order, which does not call for any interference.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

6. The petitioner has filed order sheets of the ‘STAT’, which shows that in various hearing, the peti