1 2025:CGHC:35697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3847 of 2025 1 - Pawan Dadsena S/o Vijay Kumar Dadsena Aged About 27 Years R/o Ward No. 11, Mathura Nagar, P.O. Chikhalakasa Dallirajhara, District - Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Transport, Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Transport Department 3rd Floor Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Transport Officer Korba District - Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 24/07/2025 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is praying for the following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be 2 pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and remove the locked (black listing) of the vehicle vide registration no. CG 12 BF 6075 of the petitioner. 10.2 Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioners. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not challenging any particular order, but same is being preferred by the petitioner against the inaction on the part of the respondents authority whereby the respondent authority has illegally and arbitrary manner locked (black listed) the vehicle of the petitioner without giving any opportunity of hearing against the Motor Vehicle Act. He further submits that the petitioner has made a representation dated 17.04.2025 (Annexure P/4) to the respondent no. 3 which is still pending. He therefore, prayed for a direction to respondent no. 3 to decide his representation within a time frame. 3. Learned Counsel for the respondents raises no objection. 4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner, it is directed that respondent no. 3 shall decide the representation filed by the petitioner on 17.04.2025 (Annexure P/4) in accordance with law, 3 rules and regulations as soon as possible. 6. With the aforesaid direction the present petition is dispose of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima