JUDGMENT Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. - This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein a direction has been sought for upon the respondent-authorities to fix the stoppage of the vehicle of the petitioner particularly at Massanjore, Rameshwar and Shivri as the vehicle of the petitioner has been granted permit for the route of Dumka to Bolpur and in between no stoppage has been given. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that initially he has been allowed the permit with stoppage subject to the condition that if any vehicle is given stoppage in the route, transport authority will make requisition with the said condition. The permit was issued but immediately thereafter by the impugned decision, the authorities have taken decision that permit would be issued through the route reflected in the permit and there will no stoppage and the permit issued prior will stand repealed therefore, it has submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that authority while taking such decision has not considered the predicament of the petitioner by not allowing stoppage of the vehicle in the route which will cause financial loss to the permit-holder. 3. While on the other hand learned counsel for the State-respondent vehemently opposing the prayer, submission and ground raised by the petitioner, has submitted that issuance of permit is a right, subject to fulfillment of the condition under the Motor Vehicles Act, but so far as the fixing the stoppage, it is the discretion of the transport authority, depending upon the requisition and route position although the permit has been issued initially subject to a condition as would be evident from Annexure-1 but Annexure-1 also stipulates that with respect to stoppage the objection has been filed which is pending before the authority and the authority while taking such decision on the basis of reciprocal agreement has not allowed any stoppage save and except as per the stoppage reflected in the permit therefore, since the said decision is general in nature, the petitioner cannot be said to suffer from any discrimination. He submits that so long as any decision taken by the authority suffers from any arbitrariness the same cannot be subject matter of judicial review under the fold under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. He submits that so long as any decision taken by the authority suffers from any arbitrariness the same cannot be subject matter of judicial review under the fold under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after appreciating their rival submissions it is evident from the material available on record that the petitioner has been allotted to ply his passenger vehicle bearing No. JH04N/0507 from Dumka to Bolpur having permit No.7/2018 (West Bengal) with the time table appended thereto along with the stoppage/the said timetable is of amended in nature and the same would be said subject to the objection which is lying pending before the authority while considering the aforesaid objection has entered into a reciprocal agreement while the route is of intra district, and on the basis of that a condition has been inserted in the decision (impugned) that save and except the route reflected in the permit, there will not be any other stoppage apart from the sanctioned road and if any stoppage permit have been issued the same will be treated to be repealed against which this writ petition has been filed. 5. It is not in dispute that the transport authority is to exercise the work under the provision of Motor Vehicles Act or apply its mind and taking into consideration the predicament of the permit-holders as also the public convenience, it is also settled that the High Court sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not supposed to exercise the power of judicial review unless the decision making process suffers from any illegality or infirmity but so far as the decision is concerned, the same can only be looked into if there is any arbitrariness on the part of the authority. 6. 6. Herein, in the instant case the petitioner although has been issued a route permit subject to the objection which was lying pending before the authority which the petitioner has accepted and the authority on the basis of reciprocal agreement entered in between the Government of West Bengal through its Transport Department and the State of Jharkhand through its Transport Department since the route in question is intra-State route therefore, they come out with the reciprocal agreement whereby and where under both have agreed that save and except the route permit reflected in the permit, there will be no stoppage in between. 7. The said direction is general in nature affecting everybody and therefore it cannot be said that the petitioner only have been chosen or he has been subjected to pick and choose policy. 8. The petitioner has also not made out a case of any arbitrariness in the decision making process rather it is also not in dispute that in the route which has been reflected in the permit is being deprived is also not correct for the reason that if even Annexure-1 is subject to the objection pending before the authority which the petitioner having accepted and in pursuance thereto the decision taken which has been impugned, therefore, this Court is of the view that there is no infirmity in the said decision warranting this Court to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction conferred to it under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. In view thereof, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. Writ Petition dismissed.