Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 696 (MP)

Paramjeet Singh v. State of M. P.

2011-06-30

R.S.JHA

body2011
ORDER 1. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent/authorities in exercise of powers under section 115 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') are issuing repeated orders prohibiting heavy vehicles and traffic in the city of Jabalpur between 6 a.m. and 9 p.m. It is stated that this is causing great inconvenience to the members of the petitioner association specifically those who are plying vehicles on Bhopal-Mandla route. it is futher submitted that the repeated exercise of powers under section 115 of the Act is not envisaged by the provisions of the Act and in spite of the fact that the writ petitioners have approached the respondent/authorities by filing representation, no decision thereon has been taken by the authorities till date. 3. Shri Vivek Agrawal, learned Govt. Advocate, who appeared on behalf of the State/respondents on advance notice, has submitted that if the petitioners file a fresh representation before the concerned authorities, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously. 4. In view of the aforesaid, looking to the fact that the ban on entry of heavy vehicles and traffic in the city is prima facie imposed in the interest of public at large and for the safety to the public traveling in the city roads and also keeping in mind the fact that it is purely an administrative decision which is required to be taken by the District Administrative Authorities, without entering into the issues raised by the petitioners the petition filed by the petitioners is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-authorities that in case, the petitioners filed a fresh detailed representation before the concerned authorities along with a copy of the petition and the order passed by this Court today within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the authorities expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within a period of four weeks thereafter. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioners and therefore, the respondent/authorities while deciding the aforesaid representation would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon by either accepting or rejecting the same. 6. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioners and therefore, the respondent/authorities while deciding the aforesaid representation would be at liberty to take into consideration all facts and facets of the case and thereafter take a decision thereon by either accepting or rejecting the same. 6. With the aforesaid directions the petition filed by the petitioners stands disposed of.