Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
CASE NO.:
Special Leave Petition (civil) 3128 of 1999
PETITIONER:
M/S NORTHERN EXPRESS HIGHWAYS & ANR.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02/03/2001
BENCH:
A.P. Misra & B.N. Agrawal
JUDGMENT:
D E R
Leave granted.
L...I...T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T.......T..J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellants challenge the order passed by the High
Court dismissing the writ petition as premature. The
grievance of the appellants is that he made an application
for the grant of stage carriage permit as far back on the
12th November, 1998 but the same has yet not been disposed
of. Thus the rejection of the appellants writ petition by
the High Court as premature is unsustainable liable to be
set aside. The reply on behalf of the respondent is that
the said application for the grant of permit was sent only
on the 12th November, 1998, whereas the last date of the
receipt of the application was 31st August, 1998, hence it
was rejected being time barred. Thus the same was returned
to the appellant along with the original bank draft by speed
post with A.D. on the 15th February, 1999. Learned counsel
for the appellant submits firstly that appellant had not
knowledge of this rejection and in any case this rejection
in view of Section 80 of Motor Vehicles Act is illegal and a
nullity.
Submission on behalf of respondent is that there was a
scheme for the unemployed youth by the State of Haryana
which is annexed as Annexure R-2 which was published and
notified in the year 1998 under which appellant applied
which is withdrawn by the State of Haryana through
Notification dated 25th February, 2000. Thus apart from the
aforesaid fact of the rejection of the application of the
appellant, no relief can be granted on the said application.
On the other hand learned counsel for the appellant submits
that the application was not made under any Scheme but was
independently under Section 80 of the said Act. However,
this is disputed question of fact which has neither been
raised nor adjudicated by the High Court whose order is
impugned before us. In view of this proper course open to
the appellant was to have moved the High Court on this
subsequent cause of action instead in the present
proceedings. Such a question cannot be raised for the first
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
time before this Court in the present proceedings.
Accordingly, the present petition fails and is dismissed
without prejudice to the rights of the appellants for moving
the High Court or later recourse to any other remedy
available to him in accordance with law.