AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
12 paragraphs · 429 wordsSmita Das De, J
Affidavit-of-service be kept on record.
It appears from the writ petition that there is a deficit in court fees. An undertaking has been given to pay the amount by tomorrow, failing which an order shall remain effective against petitioner no. 1.
The petitioners in the instant case are the existing operators of the combined Route No. 211 and 211A and are accordingly plying their respective vehicles along the permitted alignment.
The petitioner submits that as per the notification No.3438-WT/3M-139/2004 dated 02.08.2004 restrictions have been imposed in formulation and opening of new routes within the Kolkata/Howrah area.
Subsequently, a notification No. 1128-ET/8S-50/2000 Pt.-III dated 28.03.2008 has been issued by the Transport Department which indicates that no new permits for any routes originating from, or terminating at or touching areas within the Kolkata Municipal Corporation can be issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata without the prior approval of the Transport Department.
The petitioner raised an objection by way of a representation dated 23.09.2025 against the resolution dated 29.08.2025 adopted by the Regional Transport Authority, Kolkata.
The petitioner raised an objection against Agenda No. 15 dated 21.01.2026 whereby the Regional Transport Authority has decided to allow the proposed new bus route with a fleet strength of sixty, subject to issuance of a notification by the Transport Department, Government which dehors the notification dated 28.03.2008.
The petitioner raised an objection to the said resolution adopted by the Regional Transport Authority for formulating a new Route originating from Berachampa Sahidullah College to Kolkata Railway Station by way of a representation dated 23.09.2025. However, the same remains pending for consideration.
Mr. Pantu Deb Roy, Ld. AGP Learned Counsel appearing for the State raises an objection to the locus standi of the petitioner in filing the instant writ petition, contending that the petitioner has no locus to challenge the grant of permit. It is further submitted that the terminus at R.G.Kar Hospital has been shifted to Kolkata Railway Station.
After careful consideration, I am of the considered view that since the petitioner has already made a representation dated 23.09.2025 before the Regional Transport Authority the same ought to be considered and disposed of in accordance with law within a period of 60 days by passing a reasoned order upon affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the other stake holders if any, and communicate such decision within a week thereafter.
The writ petition being WPA 4878 of 2026 is disposed of without going into the merits of the case.