Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010286552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WA/414/2025 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION GUWAHATI (M.T.A.G.) REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI DEVRAJ DAS, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, SON OF LATE JYOTIRINDA KUMAR DAS, RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 54, BYE LANE NO. 1, AJANTA PATH, SURVEY, BELTOLA, IN THE DISTRICT OF KAMRUP, ASSAM, PIN -781028. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, DISPUR, GUWAHATI, ASSAM, PIN -781006. 2:THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER SECRETARY KAMRUP METRO BETKUCHI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN - 781040. 3:DISTRICT TRANSPORT OFFICER AND SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY KAMRUP METRO BETKUCHI GUWAHATI ASSAM PIN -781040 4:CHAIRMAN Page No.# 2/5 RTA AND DISTRICT COMMISSIONER KAMRUP M BLOCK - A 4TH FLOOR JANATA BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI - 781006 For the appellant/petitioner(s) : Mr. K. K. Mahanta, Sr. Advocate For the Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Nath, Sr. GA, Assam Mr. N. Paul, Advocate Mr. G. Anthony, Advocate Mr. M. Borah, Advocate – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 19.12.2025 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. K. K. Mahanta, learned senior Advocate for the appellant and Mr. D. Nath, learned senior Government Advocate, Assam, for the respondents/State of Assam. The appellant association has put to challenge the order dated 17.12.2025, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) No. 6117/2025. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has refused to stay the operation of the Resolution No. 2 adopted in the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Kamrup (M), held on 05.04.2025, declaring the Bus Routes No. 23 and 36 in the city of Guwahati to be Green Routes, leaving no option for the members of the appellant Page No.# 3/5 association but to convert their buses to CNG or electric buses, or to apply for migration to other routes. The main contention of Mr. Mahanta is that such decision could be taken only under a scheme, implementation of which would require certain formalities to be completed, like placing the scheme for public consumption, giving time to the persons affected to respond to, or to oppose and, then, only finally the scheme could be implemented. No such procedure or formality was followed by the Transport Department/RTA and the impugned notification was issued rendering the members of the appellant association completely dysfunctional, with severe financial connotations as well. Mr. Nath, learned senior Government Advocate, Assam, however has pointed out that by the very conduct of the appellant association, they are disentitled to seek any interim relief. He has referred to paragraph 3 of the impugned order dated 17.11.2025, which records that on two occasions, when the matter was listed before the learned Single Judge, time was taken by the appellant/writ petitioner on some pretext or the other. The other argument of Mr. Nath is that under the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Single Judge had, by the impugned order, given a complete protective cover to the appellant in as much as the members of the appellant association, who had not yet applied for migration to other route(s), were given the liberty to apply for such migration, notwithstanding any cut-off date having been fixed by the department, and also by making the decision of the RTA subject to the outcome of the writ petition. Page No.# 4/5 We fully agree with the submissions raised on behalf of the State regarding non-maintainability of the present appeal, especially for the purposes of putting a blanket stay on the notification of the Regional Transport Authority, converting two of the bus routes to Green Routes, thereby permitting only the electric/CNG operated buses to ply on the said Green Routes. We find from the records that the notification in question does not exclude the members of the appellant association from plying their buses on the afore-noted Green Routes, subject to converting their vehicles into electric/CNG operated vehicles. We also find no merit in the contention of the appellant that such decision has been taken only for the purpose of monopolizing the plying of the State-operated buses in the above Green Routes. The notification does not spell out that the said Green Routes would be limited only for State owned buses, but for all CNG/electric buses. The decision of the RTA may not amount to implementation of a new scheme, but only varying the conditions of the permit, where the requirements under Section 98 to 101 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 would not be applicable. We keep open such question for the present, as Mr. Mahanta, learned senior counsel for the appellant association seeks to withdraw this appeal in order to test his case before the learned Single Judge with the liberty to him to press for seeking some financial benefit with respect to payment of the dues, should he not succeed before the learned Single Judge. We permit Mr. Mahanta to withdraw this appeal, with the liberty Page No.# 5/5 aforesaid. Any observation made in this order will not affect the case of the appellant/writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant