ANIL SINGH THAKUR Vs. STATE OF M. P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) Present petitioner, who is Bus Operator has preferred this petition seeking direction in respect of execution of counter signature over Reciprocal Transport Agreement by the State of Maharashtra.

(3.) Grievance as echoed by learned counsel for the petitioner is that on behalf of respondents a Reciprocal Transport Agreement between State of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra exists in respect of grant of State Carriage Temporary Permit. Petitioner preferred an application for temporary permit before the State of Madhya Pradesh, which was duly signed and approved by the State but counter signature on behalf of State of Maharashtra has not been made and it is creating problem for the petitioner to the extent of violation of Fundamental Rights as enshrined under Articles 19 and 21 of Constitution of India as in absence of countersignature, petitioner could not ply his vehicle in the territory of Maharashtra. As per agreement dtd. 1/3/2007 between the State of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra, such denial on the part of respondent No.4 State of Maharashtra is illegal, arbitrary and unreasonable. Learned counsel for the petitioner further placed the order dtd. 13/9/2019 passed in Writ Petition No.18745/2019 along with other orders of this Court and seeks parity. According to him, petition can be disposed of with a direction to the State of Maharashtra as given into the said order. Learned counsel for the respondents/State appearing on behalf of respondents has no objection to this proposition and submitted that duties/obligation of State of Madhya Pradesh have been performed by the authorities working within the territory of State of Madhya Pradesh and it is turn of State of Maharashtra to comply their part of performance.