IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNA S DIXIT WRIT PETITION NOS.9724-9725/2019 (MV) Between:
Sri.D.M.Shivaprasad, S/o Sri.D.S.Mallikarjunappa, Aged about 42 years, Kalpavruksha Travels, Chelur Road, Chintamani, Chickballapur District-563 125 (By Sri.B.R.Sundararaja Gupta, Advocate) And:
The Secretary, Regional Transport Authority, Bengaluru Rural, B.D.A.Complex, Koramangala, Bengaluru-560 034 …Petitioner ... Respondent (By Sri.Dildar Shiralli, HCGP) These writ petitions are filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to direct the respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner’s applications dated 02.12.2018 for grant of temporary permit and the application dated 15.02.2016 for renewal of the permit No.16/97-98 on merit in accordance with law and vide Annexures-A and B.
These writ petitions coming on for Preliminary Hearing this day, the court made the following:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioner-a Route Permit Holders is against non-consideration of his application in the prescribed form dated 15.02.2016, a copy whereof is at Annexure-A and another application dated 05.12.2018 for the grant of temporary route permit at Annexure-B, by the respondent-Authority.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the right to apply for grant of permit or for the grant of temporary permit emanates from the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Rules made thereunder; and that the claim of the petitioner for the grant of these permits having remained unconsidered, has approached the Writ Court.
3. Sri. Dildar Shiralli, the learned High Court Government Pleader, after accepting the notice for the respondent, fairly submits that there is a statutory duty on the respondent to consider the claim of the applicant for grant of route permit/temporary route permit, regardless of the result of such consideration; he would instruct the respondent to consider the petitioner’s applications at Annexures-A and B within a period to be prescribed by this Court as has been already done in similar matters vide judgment dated 06.02.2019 in W.P.Nos.7262 to 7265/2016 (MV), a copy whereof is at Annexure-C. The stand of the respondent is reasonable and fair.
3. In the above circumstances, these writ petitions succeed in part; a Writ of Mandamus issues to the respondent to take a decision on the petitioner’s applications at Annexure-A dated 15.02.2016 and Annexure-B dated 02.12.2018 within a period of two weeks after soliciting any information/documents as may be required for such consideration, and further to inform the petitioner, the result thereof, forthwith.
Costs made easy.
Sd/- JUDGE PYR