05.01.2026 Ct. no.10 Sl. 45 b.r. WPA 29382 of 2025 Anil Chowdhury Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Sanat Kumar Roy Mr. Atanu Basu Mr. B. Ghosal …. For the petitioner Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, Ld. AGP Mr. Pannalal Bandyopadhya ….. for the State. 1. Affidavit of service filed in Court, is taken on record. 2. Heard the parties through their learned counsels. 3. The petitioner in the instant case is the holder of a permit PSt.P no. 03/20-21 for plying the vehicle for the route Maldanga to Memari extended upon Bamunpara for rendering service to the commuters. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner already on two occasions made applications for granting extension of the route. The said extension was accordingly done by the authority concerned. 2 5. Main grievance of the petitioner is that despite there being a valid permit with an approved time table for the route in question for three round trips (i.e. three upon and three down) the concerned Bus owner association is creating hindrance, debarring the petitioner to ply his vehicle in the said route as per the round trips mentioned in the permit. 6. The petitioner submits that the bus owners association conventionally in a routine manner monitors and controls the plying of the vehicles in the said route, thereby compelling the petitioner to ply his vehicle by covering the said route in two round trips instead of three round trips. 7. Petitioner has already served a legal notice upon the authority concerned on 29.3.2025, but the same remains pending for consideration. 8. The State-respondents submits that already an FIR has been registered before the Monteswar PS and a proceeding has been initiated for taking cognizance against the delinquent operators. 3 9. After careful consideration of the case based on the available records I find that petitioner is being unnecessarily harassed by the bus owners association by not permitting him to ply his vehicle covering the route in three round trips which runs contrary to the mandate of the valid permit granted to the petitioner by the authority. 10. In view of the above, I direct the respondent nos. 3,4,5 to fix a date of hearing by serving notice upon the petitioner and arrive at a consensus by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law upon affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested parties, if any, within a period of sixty days and communicate such decision to the petitioner preferably within a week thereafter. 11. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition, WPA 29382 of 2025 stands disposed of without going into the merits of the case. 12. Report filed by the respondent no.5, is taken on record. 4 13. Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished expeditiously. (Smita Das De, J.)