1 2025:CGHC:16419 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1946 of 2022 1 - Mukesh Sharma S/o Shri Late Tezbahadur Sharma Aged About 50 Years R/o Gaurav Enterprises, Main Road Dantewada, District- Dantewada (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Urban Administrative Department Mantralay New Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Municipal Council Dantewada Through- The Cheif Municipal Officer Dantewada Distt. Dantewada (C.G.) 3 - The Collector Dantewada, Distt. Dantewada (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer P.W.D. South Bastar Dantewada Distt. Dantewada (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Anuj Kumar Pandey, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For State :- Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR Date: 2025.04.08 18:24:05 +0530 2 08.04.2025 1. The instant petition is being filed by the petitioner for seeking direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the application of the petitioner for grant of permanent inter-state stage carriage for Pendraroad to Shahdol route with one return trip daily, for which, the application has been submitted through online mode on 01.04.2025. 2. The petitioner has filed the petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the State Transport Authority to consider and dispose of the application of the petitioner dated 01.04.2025 (Annexure P/2) in accordance with the provisions of Motor Vehicle Act in a meeting scheduled to be held on 7 & 8 of the April 2025. 10.2 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.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a sum of Rs.1 Lakh has been given to him out of total amount of Rs.26 Lakhs8 Hundred 50. He submits that when the total amount was demanded, the respondent No. 4 Executive Engineer has issued a memo dated 09.03.2018 to the petitioner, by which it has been stated that since funds are not available, as such, the said amount cannot be released. 3 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents opposes the same and submits that from perusal of the documents, it seems that without there being any work order, perhaps the petitioner has supplied the materials which is also in dispute that whether such supply is made or not. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Be that as it may, since the respondent No. 4 Executive Engineer has issued a memo dated 09.03.2018, as such, the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned respondent authorities along with an application for payment of the amount which he is claiming and the concerned respondent authorities, in turn, shall consider and decide the application of the petitioner and shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a stipulated time. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The concerned Collector is at liberty to pass the orders on its own merits, in accordance with law. 8. With this observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha