Arun Kumar Raghuvanshi vs State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others

Amit Seth, J

The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, claiming for the following reliefs:-

"7.1 That, it is humbly prayed that, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and issue writ of mandamus or certiorari or any other suitable writ order or direction, against the respondent no.2 to decide the pending application Annexure P/1 and Annexure P/2 by holding meeting or through procedure of circulation as per Rule 65 (2) and (3) within a stipulate time.

7.2 That, the respondent no.3 may kindly be directed to consider the application and grant a temporary stage carriage permit Annexure P/3 and Annexure P/4 under section 87 (1) (d) of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 on route Ratlam to Udaipur in favour of the petitioner for operating on notified route during the pendency on his renewal/fresh permit application in the interest of justice.

7.3 Any other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deem fit to redress the grievance of petitioner."

It is the case of the petitioner that his applications (Annexure P/1 and Annexure P/2), seeking regular interstate permits from Ratlam to Udaipur, as per terms of reciprocal transport agreement, are pending consideration before the competent authority, i.e., respondent No.2 since August 2025.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in respect of the route from Ratlam to Udaipur, his applications for grant of temporary permits (Annexure P/3 and Annexure P4), are also pending consideration before respondent No.3 and, therefore, respondent No. 2 & 3 may be directed to decide the aforesaid pending applications within specified time limit.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the applications at Annexures P/1 and P/2, in respect of regular interstate permits, are for the purposes of a single trip and a return trip, respectively. The applications at Annexures P/3 and P/4, in respect of temporary permits, are for the same purpose

Learned State counsel does not have any objection to the innocuous prayer made by the petitioner.

In view of the above, the instant writ petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of with direction to the petitioner to place certified copy of the order passed by this Court today before the respondent No.2 along with copy of writ petition and relevant annexures within a period of seven days from today and in turn, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the applications of the petitioner (Annexure - P/1 and Annexure P/2) for regular interstate permits as expeditiously as possible.

In the meantime, it is further directed that until such time the applications for regular interstate permits are decided by the respondent No.2, the pending applications of the petitioner for grant of temporary permits for Ratlam to Udaipur route be decided by the respondent No.3 in terms of timeline prescribed in circular dated 04/06/2014, and the decision whereof be communicated to the petitioner, on the petitioner communicating/furnishing the copy of the order passed in the instant writ petition along with memo of writ petition and relevant annexures before respondent No. 3 within a period of seven days from today.

Needless to emphasize that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case, and it shall be open for the authority to consider and decide the pending applications of the petitioner in accordance with law as per timeline prescribed therein.

Pending application (s), if any, shall stand closed.

Certified copy as per rules.