THE BERAR REGULAR MOTOR SERVICES PROP GHANSHYAM AGARWAL v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 2024-02-02. THE BERAR REGULAR MOTOR SERVICES PROP GHANSHYAM AGARWAL v. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH. Read the...
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND RAMESH PHADKE nd ON THE 2 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 WRIT PETITION No. 2570 of 2024 BETWEEN:- THE BERAR REGULAR MOTOR SERVICES PROP GHANSHYAM AGARWAL S/O LATE SHRI OMKARMAL AGARWAL, AGED-81 YEARS, OCCUPATION: BUS OPERATOR R/O BHAINSDEHI DISTRICT BETUL (MADHYA PRADESH) ..... PETITIONER (BY SHRI NEERENDRA SHARMA- ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH) 2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA MUMBAI (MAHARASHTRA) 3. SECR ETARY STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MOTI MAHAL, GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH) 4. SECR ETARY STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY MTNL BUILDING FOUNTAIN BUILDING-2 5TH FLOOR MG ROAD FORT MUMBAI (MAHARASHTRA) ..... RESPONDENTS (BY SHRI K. S. TOMAR- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE ) This petition coming on for admission this day, th e court passed the following: ORDER 1.
The petitioner has raised a grievance that there is a Reciprocal Transport Agreement between the State of Madhya Pradesh and State of Signature Not Verified Signed by: CHANDNI Signing time: 03-Feb-24 2:57:49 PM Maharashtra in regard to grant of State Carriage temporary Permit No. 07/STA/2024 from Chhindwara to Akola (Inter-State) covered by vehicle No. MH20-DD9851 valid w. e. f. 03. 01. 2024 to 30. 04. 2024. Despite the application made for counter-signature, the STA Maharashtra is not counter-signing the permit nor permitting the petitioner to ply the vehicle in the portion of State of Maharashtra. As per the agreement dated 01. 03. 2007 between the State of Madhya Pradesh and State of Maharashtra, such denial on the part of respondent No. 4 is unjust, arbitrary and illegal. 2. In view of such submissions, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.
2 and 4 to take a decision on counter-signature of the permit under the provisions of Reciprocal Agreement notified dated 01. 03. 2007 within a period of 30 days of receipt of a certified copy of the order, which the petitioner shall be obliged to furnish to respondents No. 2 and 4 within 07 days from today and when such order is furnished, the authorities of respondents No. 2 and 4 shall either counter-sign the permit if it fulfills the requirements of the agreement dated 01. 03. 2007 or shall communicate the reasoning for not counter-signing the permit to the petitioner, to which the petitioner will be free to assail before the appropriate Forum. In the meanwhile, the petitioner will be permitted to ply his vehicle in accordance with terms and conditions of the permit and the said vehicle be not stopped on the ground of non-countersigning the permit by the State of Maharashtra subject to the condition that petitioner complies with all other conditions of the permit. 3. C. C.
as per rules. (MILIND RAMESH PHADKE) Signature Not Verified Signed by: CHANDNI Signing time: 03-Feb-24 2:57:49 PM JUDGE Chandni Signature Not Verified Signed by: CHANDNI Signing time: 03-Feb-24 2:57:49 PM
Source: High Court of Madhya Pradesh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.