226 HEM RAJ STATE O F HARYANA & ORS. CORAM: Present: HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) 1. that he was operating his bus on the route B and the only question was whether, the passengers can be dropped and picked up at Kalka or not. By an interim order petitioner was allowed the said benefit. 2. evident has come on record in accordance to on behalf of the petitioner. 3. appears on behalf of the petitioner hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. 4. 5. disposed of. 05-05-2025 Sapna Goyal NOTE: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12428 Date of Decision : 05 HEM RAJ VERSUS STATE O F HARYANA & ORS. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI None for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Girdhar, AAG Haryana. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that he was operating his bus on the route B and the only question was whether, the passengers can be dropped and picked up at Kalka or not. By an interim order dated petitioner was allowed the said benefit. Learned counsel for the respondent has come on record to show as to whether, the petitioner is still operating in accordance to the said permission or not, as of now as there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Keeping in view the fact that 24 years have passed and no one appears on behalf of the petitioner hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. Dismissed for non-prosecution. Any civil miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands disposed of. 2025 Sapna Goyal NOTE: Whether speaking: YES Whether reportable: NO IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 12428-2001 (O&M) Date of Decision : 05-05-2025 ........Petitioner VERSUS ........Respondent(s) HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI Saurabh Girdhar, AAG Haryana. HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI, J. (Oral) In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that he was operating his bus on the route Bandli to Tipra via Chail, Solan, Kalka and the only question was whether, the passengers can be dropped and picked up dated 21.08.2001 passed by this Court, the nsel for the respondent-State submits that nothing as to whether, the petitioner is still operating as of now as there is no representation eeping in view the fact that 24 years have passed and no one appears on behalf of the petitioner hence, it can be safely presumed that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the present writ petition. prosecution. l miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) JUDGE : YES O HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI In the present petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is andli to Tipra via Chail, Solan, Kalka and the only question was whether, the passengers can be dropped and picked up , the State submits that nothing as to whether, the petitioner is still operating as of now as there is no representation eeping in view the fact that 24 years have passed and no one appears on behalf of the petitioner hence, it can be safely presumed that the l miscellaneous application pending if any, also stands (HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI) SAPNA GOYAL 2025.05.06 17:25 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document