- (1.) THE petitioner in this WP under art.226 dated February 29, 2011 (sic) is seeking a mandamus commanding the Regional Transport Authority, Purba Medinipur to decide his application for grant of a stage carriage permit dated May 29, 2009 (at p.18).
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits as follows. The document at p.21 will show that the petitioner?s application for grant of a permit was received by the RTA on June 1, 2009. Since the application has not yet been disposed of, the petitioner is entitled to a mandamus. The document at p.21 is an acknowledgment receipt signed by a person describing himself as the "D.A." Relevant contents of the document are quoted below: "Received the application for grant of Stage Carriage Bus/Mini Bus/Trekker permit from Taimur Khan and the applicant is hereby asked to appear before the Regional Transport Authority Board on ??at??? for hearing & disposal of the application." It is evident from the document at p.21 that nothing therein can lead to a conclusion that the petitioner applied to the RTA, Purba Medinipur for grant of a stage carriage permit. There is nothing to show that after May 29, 2009 the petitioner took any step. If he actually filed the application and the application was not taken up for consideration by the RTA, his natural reaction would have been to write to the RTA for ascertaining the fate of the application.
(3.) EVEN assuming that the petitioner submitted the application dated May 29, 2009, and that it has not yet been disposed of by the RTA, I do not find any reason to interfere in the matter in exercise of power under art.226, for the petitioner is inviting this Court to exercise the power mechanically. It is not the case of the petitioner that though his turn came, the RTA did not take up the matte for consideration. Nor is it his case that any application filed by any other person after him was taken up by the RTA ignoring his prior application.;