104. 03.09.2026 Court No.8 (Tanmoy) MAT/1182/2026 IA NO: CAN/1/2026 HUMAYUN SHAIKH VS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. Mr. Sattwik Bhattacharyya Mr. Aritra Roy Ms. Reshma Sharma …for the appellant. Mr. Udayan Chakravarty, Sr. Adv. Mr. Niladri Saha …for the State. Dictated by Arijit Banerjee, J. 1. By consent of the parties, the appeal and the connected application are taken up together for hearing. 2. This appeal is directed against an order dated July 8, 2026, passed in WPA/29351/2025 and IA No: CAN/1/2026. 3. In the writ petition, the appellant/writ petitioner had challenged a Resolution dated November 25, 2025, passed by the State Transport Authority, West Bengal, deciding to grant permit to certain Bus Operators on inter-regions routes, which, according to the appellant, is contrary to Section 69 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, read with the prevailing notifications. 2 4. On the writ petition, direction for exchange of affidavits was passed. It appears that affidavits have been exchanged. 5. In view of the fact that there was some delay in disposal of the writ petition, an application being IA No: CAN/1/2026 was made by the writ petitioner praying for an interim order of stay of operation of the Resolution dated November 25, 2025, pending disposal of the writ petition. Such interim order was refused by the learned Single Judge by the order dated July 8, 2026. Hence this appeal. 6. We see that the writ petition is ready for hearing. If the appellant is right in contending that the Resolution dated November 25, 2025, which is impugned in the writ petition, has been passed in violation of law, and since it is submitted that pursuant to such Resolution and permits granted on the basis thereof, other operators are illegally plying their vehicles on the same route on which the appellant is plying his vehicle, then the appellant may be suffering some prejudice, which should be addressed as soon as possible. 7. We, therefore, dispose of this appeal by granting liberty to the appellant to make a prayer before the learned Single Judge to give some 3 precedence to the appellant’s writ petition. We request the learned Single Judge to consider such prayer to the extent possible and to the extent the business of the Court may permit. 8. The appeal being MAT/1182/2026 and the connected application being IA No: CAN/1/2026 stand disposed of accordingly. 9. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities. (Arijit Banerjee, J.) (Rishad Medora, J.)