RABINDRA KUMAR RAY Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR . P. K. Panda, learned Standing Counsel (Transport) states that, as yet the opposite party members have given no instruction to him. Regard being had to the nature of the dispute, which is purely based on law, we heard the parties and dispose of this Writ Petition at the stage of admission.

(2.) PETITIONER 's grievance, stated by Learned Counsel for the petitioner, is as against the instruction, Annexure -6 issued by the Transport Commissioner -cum -Chairman, STA, Orissa, Cuttack, vide his Letter No. 24291, dated 20.11.1997. On the ground of saturation/over -saturation of certain routes and non -availability of adequate transport services in some other routes in under -developed area in the State, Opp. Party No. 3 has issued the above instruction, Annexure -6. The operative part of that instruction/letter reads as follows :

(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel (Transport) on the other hand states that the Opp. Party No. 3 only with a view to regulate proper transport service and conveyance in all the localities, has issued that instruction as a matter of public policy and therefore, that does not offend the aforesaid statutory provision.