ESSKEY ROADWAYS FIRM Vs. ANANDHAKRISHNAN BUS SERVICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant along with the contesting respondent had applied for grant of stage carriage permit on the route from Tiruchirapalli to Jayankondam on or before 10/10/1975. Objections have been called for on 22/10/1975 and the last date to file the objections was 10/11/1975. On consideration of the respective claims the RTA, Tiruchirapalli awarded to the appellant 10 marks and 8 marks to the respondent. On that premise RTA granted permit to the appellant. The respondent carried the matter in appeal to the STAT which by its order dated 14/11/1977 set aside the order of RTA and granted the permit to the respondent. In CRP No. 88 of 1978 by order dated 5/3/1980 the learned Single Judge upheld the order of STAT. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

(2.) The only question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the RTA should consider the respective claims as on the date of the consideration or as on the date of the application. The RTA held that the date of application was the relevant date. But the Appellate Authority and the High court found that the date of the consideration was the relevant date. Admittedly, the respondent-partnership firm was reconstituted on 1/4/1976 taking one Easwaran as a managing partner and it was registered on 21/5/1976 under Section 69 of the Partnership Act. Admittedly, the managing partner had the technical qualification as on the date of consideration. The managing partner being the technically qualified man, the respondents are entitled to the award of two more marks on the ground of qualifications. The Appellate tribunal taking that fact into consideration awarded 10 marks and on comparative evaluation, since the respondent by then had three permits, granted the permit to the respondent. The questionwhether the date of consideration is the relevant date is no longer res integra. This court in Maharashtra State Road Transport Corpn. v. Mangrulpir Jt. Motor Service (P) Ltd. held that :

(3.) Another circumstance arose in Dhani Devi v. Sant Bihari case was that when one of the applicants before the consideration died and his LRs were brought on record. When it was questioned, this court held that the LRs are entitled to be considered as inheriting the estate of the deceased applicant for grant of permit. In A. S. Jalaluddin v. Balasubramania Bus Service (P) Ltd the question arose that whether the applicant who secured the residential qualification by establishing a branch office at one of the terminus of the route would be considered eligible as on the date of the consideration. This court held that he is entitled. In view of these considerations, it must be held that the date of consideration is the relevant date for the purpose of considering the eligibility to grant the required marks under Section 46 of Act 4 of 1939. This law being in operation from 1970, we do not think that it requires any reconsideration by this court by a larger bench. Accordingly, we hold that the date of consideration is the relevant date on which the respective claims of the candidates have to be considered for award of the marks for grant of permit. It is made clear that this declaration of law is confined to and peculiar of the statutory operation under Section 46 of Act 5 of 1958.