BINDESHWAR MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. H.K. Mahato the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Richa Sanchita, the learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 22.07.2016 passed by the respondent no.3, Deputy Transport Commissioner cum Secretary, South Chhotanagpur, Ranchi whereby the grant to permit for is replaced auto rickshaw No.JH01F7822 has been refused.

(3.) Mr. Mahato, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner was having the permission with regard to auto rickshaw and that permit was valid from 09.05.2014 to 05.09.2014. He submits that in view of the fact that as the old auto rickshaw has attained the age of 10 years, he requires to replace the same and in that view of the matter he purchased the new petrol auto rickshaw and applied for approval of the said permit to the said auto rickshaw, but by the impugned order the same has been refused by the authority concerned. He submits that the ground taken in the rejection order is not tenable. He submits that the expiry date of the said has been wrongly recorded as 22.09.2012 and it has been rejected. He draw the attention of the Court to Annexure 4 at page 25 which is old permit of the petitioner wherein it is clearly depicted that the permit is valid from 09.05.2014 to 05.09.2014. In that view of the matter, the impugned order cannot sustain in the eye of law.