128 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-16013-2026 Date of Decision : 27.05.2026 BHUPINDER KAUR .....Petitioner VERSUS STATE TRANSPORT COMMISSIONER PUNJAB AND ORS. .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present : Mr. Rajinder Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Kumar Goyal, Addl.A.G., Punjab. KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral) 1. The main grievance which propelled the present petitioner to approach this Court by casting instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, is the indolent and lackadaisical approach of the authority concerned, in not deciding her legal notice dated 01.05.2026 (Annexure P-3). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied, in case a mandamus is passed upon respondents, to take a final decision on her legal notice (supra), in a time bound manner. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel, on instruction from Mr. Baljinder Singh Dhillon, PCS (RTA), Jalandhar, submits that the DHARAM VIR 2026.05.29 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-16013-2026 -2- respondent authorities, will take a final decision on the aforesaid legal notice, within a period of 08 weeks. 4. In view of the above, no mandamus is required to be passed upon the respondents. Therefore, the instant petition, is hereby, closed. However, this Court is sanguine that the respondents shall adhere to the above statement, as made by learned State counsel. 5. Disposed of accordingly. (KULDEEP TIWARI) May 27, 2026 JUDGE dharamvir Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No DHARAM VIR 2026.05.29 17:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document