SRIKANT PRASAD SINGH Vs. BAIKUNTH SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr Ranjit Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants. Nobody appears on behalf of the respondents in spite of notice. The controversy in this case is regarding the grant of permits for the extended route of a distance of ten miles more from Begusarai to Barauni via Eastern Tilrath Gurnti, Barauni Block, Pipra Chowk. The RTA keeping in view the existing policies of the government of Bihar decided to grant temporary and provisional extension of the existing routes in favour of the appellants. Permit was also granted in favour of one Radha Krishna singh by a separate agenda. It may be noted that Baikunth Singh who is respondent 1 in this appeal only filed objections against the grant of extension of the existing route in favour of Radha Krishna Singh. He did not raise any objection with regard to the grant of applications for extension of routes filed by the appellants before us.

(2.) All the parties aggrieved against the order of RTA went in revi- sion before the State Transport Appellate tribunal. The tribunal by its order dated 18/05/1976 allowed the revisions filed by the appellants before us. The tribunal held in favour of the appellants and directed that g the order granting extension in their favour is confirmed but the portion of the order of the RTA that extension was temporary and provisional is set aside and it was directed to make the aforesaid extension permanent on conditions which may be considered proper by the RTA.

(3.) Aggrieved against the aforesaid order of the tribunal Baikunth singh filed a writ petition before the High court. The High court held that it was necessary for the RTA to comply with the provisions of Section 47 (3 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and to determine the number of stage carriages to be plied on the extended route and thereafter theapplications could have been considered. The High court did not decide the question regarding the non-filing of objections by Baikunth Singh against the applications filed by the appellants. The High court took the view that the entire order of the RTA was without jurisdiction and as such there was no need of going into the question of non-filing of objections by Baikunth Singh against the applications filed by the appellants.