AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sanjay Dwivedi, J
Learned counsel for the petitioner, by the instant petition, is challenging the temporary permit issued in favour of respondents No.3 and 4. He submits
that the petitioner has been granted regular permit which covers part of the route of temporary permit issued in favour of respondents No.3 and 4. He
further submits that the temporary permit issued is purely illegal as the same has been issued on double tax basis.
Learned counsels appearing for respondents No.3 and 4 raised an objection regarding maintainability of this petition on the ground of availability of
alternative remedy as revision under Section 90 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, lies against the said order. Therefore, according to the respondents,
the petitioner should avail the alternative remedy.
At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of this petition with liberty to file revision petition within a period of 7 days from
today. He is further asking that if the revision petition is filed by the petitioner within 7 days, then the revisional authority may be directed to decide the
same within a period of 45 days therefrom.
Accordingly, this petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition within a period of 7 days from today.
The revisional authority is directed to decide the revision so preferred by the petitioner, within a further period of 45 days from the date of filing the
same, in accordance with law giving opportunity of hearing to all the concerned.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The revisional authority shall consider and decide the revision
petition in accordance with law.