1 2026:CGHC:21069 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1980 of 2026 1 - Mahendra Kumar Verma S/o Shri Dauram Verma Aged About 45 Years R/o - Village - Dongariakhurd, Tahasil - Pandariya, Distt. - Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The Regional Transport Authority Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate For State :- Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB-Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06.05.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records pertaining to case of petitioner. VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set- aside the impugned order dated 17.03.2026 and direct the respondent to consider and decide the application of petitioner for grant of permanent stage carriage, in compliance of provision under Sub - Section 2 of Section 80 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, in the interest of justice. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner, may also be granted.” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in WPC No. 2016/2026 (Manoj Kumar Mantri vs. The State Transport Authority) decided on 28.04.2026. It is prayed that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms of the observations and findings recorded therein. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below:– “2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach before the concerned STAT and the concerned STAT may be directed to decide the same in accordance with law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and to pass appropriate order within some specific period. 3 3. No objection has been raised from other side. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that if the petitioner approaches before the concerned STAT within a period of 15 days, the concerned STAT is directed to consider the same and to decide the same within a period of 45 days after giving notice to all the objectors. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.” 3. Since the grievance of the petitioner is identical to the one considered in WPC No. 2016/2026 (Manoj Kumar Mantri vs. The State Transport Authority) decided on 28.04.2026 and the petitioner in the present case is also seeking the same relief, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of and in line with the aforesaid order. 4. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha