Hafiz Mohammad Yusuf vs State of M.P.

Sheel Nagu, J.—The Prayer for a direction to the State of U.P. to counter sign the temporary permit Annexure P/3 sought to be issued in favour of the petitioner, is based on the foundational fact that the petitioner is plying his vehicle on the basis of temporary permit which is still subsisting. The present petition is filed on the basis of the temporary permit issued under Sec. 87 of the Motor Vehicle Act 1988 by order dated 28.3.2012 (Annexure P/3) for the route from Khajuraho to Delhi for the period from 01.04.2012 to 31.07.2012.

There is not even a whisper in the writ petition that there was either a fresh temporary permit issued after 31.7.2012 or the temporary permit Annexure P/3 continues to valid.

In view of the temporary permit not being subsisting after 31.07.2012 the merits of the petition need not be gone into as that would be a mere academic exercise and issuance of futile writ is unwarranted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, no case for interference is made out under Article 226 of Constitution of India and therefore, this petition deserves to be and is hereby rejected sans cost.