Vishal Mishra, J.:— The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief;
“i. issue appropriate writ/order/direction directing respondent no. 2 not to cancel the permit and fitness certificate of petitioner's vehicle in question under the garb of the sub Rule (1b) of Rule 77 of M.P. Motor Vehicle rules Which is not applicable in the Vehicle in question.
ii. Allow present petition;
iii. Grant any other relief(s) which this Hon'ble court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of this case.”
2. It is stated by counsel for the petitioner that in pursuance to amended provisions the petitioner is not being permitted to ply his carriage vehicle. It is further alleged that the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation (Annexure P/3, dated 30.12.2019), but the same has not been decided till date and the respondent authorities are sitting tight over the matter. It is further submitted that the controversy involved herein has been squarely covered by the order dated 30.08.2018 passed in W.P. No. 7703/2018 (Waheed Khan v. Transport Department), therefore, she prays for similar relief. Thus, she has further prayed that a time bound direction be given to the respondents authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner.
3. On the other hand, learned Government Advocate has no objection to the innocuous prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the representation preferred by the petitioner shall be decided as expeditiously as possible.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to decide the representation (Annexure P/3, dated 30.12.2019) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and shall pass a self contained speaking order. The outcome of the same shall be communicated to the petitioner within the aforesaid period. The respondent authorities while deciding the case of the petitioner are expected to take note of the order passed in the case of Waheed Khan (supra).
5. Needless to say that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the petition is disposed of. No order as to cost.