BINOD RAM v. Tribunal, Bihar, Patna
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ application stands disposed off
Provisions considered
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 s. 117
Judgment
The Chairman, North Bihar Regional Transpofr Authority, Muzaffarpur.
The Secretary, North Bihar Regional Transport Authority, Muzaffarpur 5. The District Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur 6. The Additional Collector, Hajipur, District-Vaishali 7. The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali at Hajipur 8. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Mahua, Vaishali 9. The Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Mahua, Vaishali 10. The Circle Officer, Mahua, Vaishali 11. Sri. Daya Nand Singh, son of Late-Kapildeo Singh, resident of village-Mahua, Police Station-Mahua, District-Vaishali
Sri Bipin Kumar, son of Sri. Raj Ballabh Singh, resident of village- Shahwajpur Puraina, Police Station-Fatehpur, District-Vaishali. ----------- …….Respondents.
10.11.2009 After having perused series of orders which have come to be passed in the litigations going on with regard to Mahua Bus Stand in the District of Vaishali the latest challenge thrown by the petitioner is to the order dated 30th of October, 2009 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bihar, in Transport Revision No. 34 of
Operative part
2007. The order does not merit any interference for the primary reason that the LPA Bench did not settle the dispute between the parties finally but left the matter open for the Tribunal to decide the case enter se. Secondly the Appellate Tribunal seems to be correct in holding that the 2 order passed by the NBRTA is based on the proposal or the report of the Superintendent of Police which has no legal basis for the reason that Section 117 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 read with Rule 191 of the Motor Vehicle Rules, 1992 does not envisage such a report coming from the Superintendent of Police. The competent authority is the District Magistrate or a Police Commissioner provided there is a Commissionery system prevailing in the relevant area. There is no legal infirmity in the order of the Appellate Tribunal. Let the matter be considered afresh by NBRTA in light of the decision rendered by the Tribunal. Let it be recorded that remand of the matter by the Tribunal is for fresh consideration of all aspect by the concerned Authority with due dispassion and objectivity. The writ application stands disposed off. Shageer (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ application stands disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 117.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.