1 2025:CGHC:20059 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 4869 of 2021 1 - Rakesh Gupta S/o Shri Ramchandra Gupta Aged About 52 Years R/o Old Post Office Road, Rajendra Pd. Ward 43, Gupta Colony, Darripara, Ambikapur, District- Surguja, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Deparment Of Transport, New Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Regional Transport Authority Chhattisgarh, Sector 27, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents (Cause-title is taken from Case Information System) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Anshul R. Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, P.L. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 01.05.2025 1. The petitioner is aggrieved with the order passed by the Regional Transport Authority, Sector 27, New Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.)/respondent No. 2 dated 12.03.2021 whereby the authority heard the matter afresh and recalled its earlier order. 2. Facts of the present case are that the petitioner moved an application on 20.05.2018 for the grant of a regular permit for route Kapu to Durg via Sitapur, Ambikapur, Bilaspur, and Raipur for one single trip daily. The Regional Transport Authority passed an order on 01.06.2019 and allowed the application moved by the petitioner. Though the order was passed by the authority, the permit was not issued SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 therefore, the petitioner filed WPC/629/2020 before this Court seeking the direction to issue a regular permit in pursuance of the order dated 01.06.2019. This Court vide order dated 14.02.2020 directed the Regional Transport Authority to take an appropriate decision on the said order dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Regional Transport Authority at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The petitioner approached the Regional Transport Authority by making a representation along with a copy of the order passed by this Court in WPC/629/2020 and vide order dated 12.03.2021, the authority after hearing the objections, recalled its earlier order and rejected the application moved by the petitioner for the grant of a regular permit. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the application moved by the petitioner for the grant of the regular permit was allowed vide order dated 01.06.2019 after hearing the objections. He would further submit that in WPC/629/2020, there was no direction to the authority to decide the matter afresh after affording due opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties. He would also submit that the Regional Transport Authority exceeded its jurisdiction by reviewing its earlier order. Thus, he would pray that the impugned order passed by the Regional Transport Authority may be set aside. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that there is an efficacious alternative remedy available in favour of the petitioner to approach the appellate authority according to provisions of Section 89 of the Motor Vehicles Act. He would also submit that the petitioner could not obtain counter-signatures of the Regional Transport Authorities of Durg, Ambikapur and Raipur and after affording the due opportunity of hearing to all parties, the Regional Transport Authority passed a fresh order, therefore, the regular permit could not be issued. 5. Heard. 6. From a perusal of documents placed on the record, it appears that vide order dated 12.03.2021, the Regional Transport Authority has not recalled its earlier order on 3 the ground that the petitioner could not obtain counter-signatures of Regional Transport Authorities of Durg, Ambikapur and Raipur but taking into consideration the time-gap, the order impugned has been recalled. In WPC/629/2020, there was a direction to take an appropriate decision in pursuance of the order dated 01.06.2019 but the Regional Transport Authority exceeded its jurisdiction and heard the matter afresh and also recalled its earlier order. The action of the Regional Transport Authority is contrary to the well-settled principles of law. It exercised the power which was not dictated by this Court, therefore the order passed by Regional Transport Authority dated 12.03.2021 is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the authority to decide the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the direction issued in WPC/629/2020 dated 14.02.2020. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi