Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Shreeram Sharma
2021 Latest Caselaw 4612 MP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 4612 MP
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2021

Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Shreeram Sharma on 24 August, 2021
Author: Sheel Nagu
                                      1

            THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                             WA.680.2021
               (The State of M.P. Vs. Shreeram Sharma)

Gwalior dated : 24/08/2021

      Shri Ankur Modi, learned Additional Advocate General for the

appellant/State.

      Shri Neerendra Sharma, learned counsel for respondent.

Learned counsel for rival parties are heard.

1. Present intra-court appeal preferred u/S.2(1) of Madhya Pradesh

Uccha Nayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 [For

brevity 'the 2005 Act'] assails the final order dated 23/02/2021 passed in

M.P. No.3423/2020 whereby learned Single Judge while exercising

supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of Constitution allowed the

petition in question by which challenge was made to the order of State

Transport Appellate Tribunal (STAT), Gwalior dated 08/12/2020 by which

the order of Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Morena was affirmed.

2. The Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Morena by order dated

16/09/2020 deferred the application for renewal of permit filed by the

respondent herein. The hearing in the said application for renewal was

postponed/deferred on the ground that bus in question had completed life

of 15 years in view of bar contained u/R 77 of M.P. Motor Vehicle Rules,

1994 (For brevity '1994 Rules').

3. The learned Single Judge while exercising supervisory jurisdiction

found that Regional Transport Authority (RTA), Morena and as well as

State Transport Appellate Tribunal (STAT), Gwalior both had misdirected

themselves by ignoring the amendment in Rule 77 of 1994 Rules which

was brought into effect from 28/12/2015 relaxing the statutory bar of 15

years of age for stage carriages registered before the amendment came into

effect. The learned Single Judge was surprised and shocked to note that

Tribunal despite being in the know of Single Bench decision of this Court

which was squarely on the point, chose not to rely upon the single Bench

decision of High Court by assigning reasons that the same is not a

reported Judgment.

4. However, the first obstacle which the State has to cross is the

statutory bar contained in Section 2(1) of the 2005 Act. Section 2(1) which

prohibits filing of writ appeal under the 2005 Act against an order passed

by Single Bench exercising supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of

Constitution.

4.1 The order under challenge was of the State Transport Appellate

Tribunal (STAT), Gwalior which is one of the Tribunals over which the

High Court exercises supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of

Constitution. Moreso, the petition preferred by respondent before the

Single Judge was titled as a petition under Article 227 of Constitution.

The relief sought in the petition is as follows :-

7.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition and the impugned orders dated 8,12.2020 (Annex.P/1 of STAT including order dated 16/09/2020 of respondent No.2 may kindly be set-aside directing to grant renewal of Permit No.SCP57/Stage/95 on existing Vehicle No.MP-33-E-0199 of 2005 model as prayed for in the interest of justice. 7.2 Any order deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be pleased.

4.2 A bare scrutiny of aforesaid relief clause reveals that the jurisdiction

sought to be exercised by respondent herein before the single bench was

under Article 227 of Constitution as there was no prayer for issuance of

any of the prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution. Thus,

the power exercised by learned Single Judge while passing the impugned

order was purely supervisory in nature.

5. Accordingly, this writ appeal is not maintainable in view of

statutory bar contained in Section 2(1) of the 2005 Act.

6. Consequently, this writ appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

                                                   (Sheel Nagu)                         (Deepak Kumar Agarwal)
                                                      Judge                                     Judge
                                                 (24/08/2021)                                (24/08/2021)

  (suneel)


SUNEE   Digitally signed by SUNEEL DUBEY
        DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
        PRADESH BENCH GWALIOR, ou=HIGH



L
        COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
        GWALIOR, postalCode=474011,
        st=Madhya Pradesh,
        2.5.4.20=157244b0239a6fd662b29b00
        a11fc66a5e160f585aa7a92425f380d47



DUBEY
        6b32818, cn=SUNEEL DUBEY
        Date: 2021.08.25 16:25:04 -07'00'
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter