M.G. NAGARATHNAMMA, W/O SRI M.N. RAJU Vs. THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, DAVANAGERE, BY ITS SECRETARY, THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, DAVANAGERE, THE KARNATAKA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, KENGAL HANUMANTHAIAH ROAD, BANGALO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Regional Transport Authority, Davanagere passed a resolution on 7.4.2006 resolving to grant, the petitioner a stage carriage permit between Kottur to Davanagere and back via Ujjini, Jagalur, Bilichodu to perform two round trips per day. Timings were assigned by the Secretary of the Regional Transport Authority on 1.8.2006. The permit was valid from 21.12.2006 to 21.12.2011. The existing operators challenged the said resolution before the Karnataka State Transport 'Appellate Tribunal by filing Revision Petition Nos. 3/07, 4/07 and 214/07. The Tribunal has set aside the said permit by its order dated 29.10.2007 and remanded the matter back to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration after obtaining a joint route survey report.

(2.) THE petitioner challenged the said order by filing a writ petition before this Court in W.P. No 17350/2007. This court dismissed the writ petition by order dated 21.10.2008. However, this Court observed that the petitioner could continue the operations on the said route till the disposal of the ease by the Regional Transport Authority. Thereafter, the Regional Transport Authority has passed a resolution as per Annexure -C dated 30.8.2011 rejecting the application of the petitioner on the ground that the route overlaps nationalised route at two stretches.

(3.) THE only submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, pending disposal of the matter before the RTA, the petitioner may be permitted to operate the services. I am of the view that petitioner is not entitled for the said relief. Even according to the petitioner, the original route overlaps the notified route. That is why she has made a submission before the Tribunal that, she will file a modified application for alternate route before the authority by curtailing the notified routes. The Tribunal therefore has remanded the matter to the 1st. respondent with a direction to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law if the petitioner files appropriate application within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order. Therefore, the question of permitting the petitioner to operate the services on the notified route does not arise. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.