Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Contempt plea by school bus operators: High Court puts Chandigarh Adviser on notice

Chandigarh, June 13 The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to UT Adviser Dharam Pal to show cause why contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him. The notice by Justice BS...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Chandigarh, June 13

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a notice to UT Adviser Dharam Pal to show cause why contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act be not initiated against him. The notice by Justice BS Walia came on a contempt petition filed by Chandigarh School Bus Operators Welfare Association through its president Manjit Singh Saini.

The petitioner, through counsel Ranjivan Singh and Kanika Toor, was among other things alleging non-compliance of the judgment passed by a Division Bench on February 10 on a petition filed by the association seeking various concessions for the Covid-19 period.

Advertisement

Ranjivan Singh contended that school buses operating for private schools in Chandigarh were completely off road since March 2020 following the Covid-19 outbreak. The school only reopened for physical teaching after two years from April.

It was added that the association had earlier approached the UT Administration on September 24, 2021, by way of memoranda seeking various concessions for the period by way of exemption in the motor vehicle tax and extension of the life span of buses for the period the vehicles were off the road. The UT Administration exempted motor vehicle tax for 2020, but a decision was not taken regarding exemption of the same from January 2021 till March 2022. Further, a call was not taken for granting extension in life span to all buses.

Advertisement

The association filed a petition, which was disposed of on February 10 following a statement made by the UT senior standing counsel that the claims were under active consideration of the Administration. The UT Adviser was also asked to decide the memoranda submitted by the association within two months.

However, the UT Adviser has not taken a final decision upon the concessions claimed within the timeframe stipulated by the High Court.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper