JUDGMENT 1. THE writ petitioner complained against non-granting of a temporary permit to him for which he made an application on the Howrah Digha route on 21.12.92. 2. EVEN if the application had succeeded it could have resulted at best in securing a temporary permit for four months only. An application for a temporary permit cannot be kept hanging for ever, and it cannot be expected that as soon as a temporary need arises the transport authorities will take from their files an old application for a temporary permit and grant it to the applicant for meeting the temporary contingency. Applications for temporary permits must therefore be made from time to time when, according to the applicant, a temporary need has arisen. The transport authorities must dispose of the application in accordance with law as and when the same is made on the above lines. 3. HOWEVER, even if an application is properly made, and even if such application is wrongfully rejected, the loss that the applicant suffers is that of having to keep his bus idle for four months. Different considerations might apply in case of an application for a permanent permit which would have the effect of keeping the permission alive for five years, and the disposal of which application calls for different standards to be applied by the transport authorities. But for refusal of a temporary permit the remedy sounds in damages and in damages alone. 4. THE Writ Court is not the proper court for working out the grievances of citizens regarding non granting of temporary stage carriage permits the lives of which never extend beyond four months and which period is utterly inadequate for the disposal even of a Writ petition, which, though it supposedly takes a shorter time than taken for disposal of suits, yet takes on an average more time than four months for its final disposal. Where money is an adequate remedy even an order for injunction is not granted A fortiori an order for Mandamus, which is the highest form of injunction know to law, cannot be granted even if the writ petitioner's complaint about non-granting of the temporary permit to him is rightful. He will have to claim damages for the wrong suffered by him and not a high prerogative Writ of Mandamus. 5. UNDER these circumstances the writ application is dismissed in limine as inappropriate and unmaintainable. He will have to claim damages for the wrong suffered by him and not a high prerogative Writ of Mandamus. 5. UNDER these circumstances the writ application is dismissed in limine as inappropriate and unmaintainable. The respondents have appeared. They do not admit the allegations in the petition. 6. ALL parties and others concerned to act on a signed copy of the dictated order on the usual undertaking. Application rejected.