HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15580 of 2025 Court No. - 40 HON'BLE SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J. HON'BLE SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to delete the respondent no. 1 from the array of parties, during the course of day. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the State-respondent no. 1 and Sri S.K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 6. 3. The petitioner no. 2 has approached this Court with the following relief: "i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 2 to 5 to restrain the respondent nos. 6 and 7 from operating their vehicle on the route NOIDA Sector - 35 - Tappal via Pari Chawk Dankaur Jewar, which are not covered under their valid permits granted and issued by the Competent Transport Authority." 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that the he has been permitted to ply his vehicle on the route from NOIDA SE C-35 to TAPPAL via Parichowk Dankaur Jewar. The distance of petitioner's permit is about 82 kilometers and the validity of the petitioner's permit is upto 29.11.2029. 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent nos. 6 and 7 are plying several vehicles, details of which are mentioned at page 44 of the paper book without having any valid permit. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Hanuman Prasad Dube, Vipul Dube Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anadi Krishna Narayana, C.S.C., Sunil Kumar Misra Noida Sector -35- Tappal Via Pari Chawk Dankaur Jewar Bus Operators Association And Another .....Petitioner(s) The State Of Up And 6 Others .....Respondent(s) 6. It is contended that without there being any valid permits, the buses shown at page 44 of the writ petition cannot be permitted to ply on the route for which the petitioner holds a valid permit. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the respondents that it is a nationalised route and all the buses have valid permit to ply on the said route and it is the corporation who has to decide as to which vehicle is to ply on the said route on the day. 8. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the route for which the petitioner is granted permit is not a nationalised route and he has also enclosed the tickets of the buses but he did not bring on record anything to indicate that these buses are not valid permit. 9. In respect to the contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner could not place on record anything to establish his prima-facie case that the buses shown at page 44 of the writ petition are not having valid permit. Though the petitioner annexed some photographs and ticket issued to passenger but the same cannot determine as to whether the buses are plying on the route of the petitioner's permit. 10. In the absence of any material on record prima-facie establishing that the buses shown at page 44 of the writ petition are plying on the route without any valid permit. We do not deem it appropriate to grant the relief as prayed for. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. October 17, 2025 Arif WRIA No. 15580 of 2025 2 (Sudhanshu Chauhan,J.) (Saral Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad