1 2026:CGHC:22475 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2410 of 2026 1 - Smt. Mamta Sahu W/o Ajay Kumar Sahu Aged About 46 Years R/o Sai Vihar Colony, Ward No. 7, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh Permanent R/o Village Sawa, Post Patharia, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Transport, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Regional Trasnport Officer Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate For State : Mr. R. K. Gupta, Addl. Advocate General Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13/05/2026 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 records of case. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 to consider and dispose of the application of petitioner for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit, in accordance with provisions of Motor Vehicles Act. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in favour of petitioner, may also be granted.” 2. Facts of the case, as projected, are that the petitioner has filed the present writ petition stating that she is the owner of vehicle bearing registration No. CG-07-BY-4985. It has been pleaded that the petitioner submitted an application dated 07.12.2025 before the competent authority for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit on the route Bilaspur via Ratanpur, Pali, Katghora and Korba. Along with the said application, all requisite documents and formalities were duly submitted by the petitioner. It is the 3 case of the petitioner that despite lapse of considerable time, the respondent authorities have neither considered nor decided the said application. According to the petitioner, no agenda has been published in relation to the application and no notice regarding consideration or disposal of the application has been issued to her by the respondent authorities. The petitioner further submits that due to non-consideration of the application for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit, the vehicle of the petitioner is lying idle without permit, resulting in continuous financial loss and hardship to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking appropriate direction for expeditious disposal of the pending application. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted an application dated 07.12.2025 for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit on the notified route along with all relevant documents before the competent authority. It is contended that the respondent authorities are under a statutory obligation to consider and decide the said application within a reasonable period. Learned counsel further submits that despite lapse of sufficient time, the application of the petitioner has not been decided and no communication whatsoever has been made to the petitioner regarding any deficiency or impediment in processing the application. It is argued that the inaction on the 4 part of the respondent authorities is arbitrary and contrary to law. It is also submitted that due to pendency of the application, the petitioner’s vehicle is lying without permit, thereby causing irreparable financial loss on a daily basis. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that an appropriate direction be issued to the concerned authorities for expeditious disposal of the pending application filed by the petitioner. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the application submitted by the petitioner shall be considered by the competent authority in accordance with the provisions governing grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit. It is submitted that the competent authority is required to examine the application and other relevant aspects before taking any final decision in the matter. Learned State counsel further submits that if the application of the petitioner is still pending, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority strictly in accordance with law within a reasonable period. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the application submitted by the petitioner on 07.12.2025 for grant of Permanent Stage Carriage Permit is still pending consideration before the competent authority, this Court 5 is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the present petition pending. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned authorities to consider and decide the pending application submitted by the petitioner on 07.12.2025 strictly in accordance with law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner and the competent authority shall take an independent decision in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Shayna Judge