(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the resolution dated 13.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent -Regional Transport Authority, Bangalore Rural District, Bangalore, thereby renewing the permit granted in favour of the 2nd respondent to be effective uptil July 2013. Petitioner is a rival operator on the route in question. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned resolution passed renewing the permit is illegal inasmuch as although there was delay in applying for renewal of the permit and though no prayer for condonation of the same was made by assigning good and acceptable cause the 1st respondent has passed the impugned order ordering for renewal of the permit imposing certain conditions to be satisfied in future.
(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
(3.) AS rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the procedure followed by the 1st respondent in granting renewal is not in conformity with the provisions contained under Sub -sections 2 and 3 of Section 81 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. It is true even if there is delay in applying for renewal of the license the Regional Transport Authority is entitled to entertain an application for renewal if it is satisfied that the applicant was prevented by good and sufficient cause from making an application within the time specified. It is relevant to notice here that the permit can be renewed on the application made not less than 15 days before the date of expiry. In the instant case, the 2nd respondent made the application seeking renewal nearly after lapse of more than one month. He had admittedly not filed any application seeking condonation of delay. In such circumstances, the 1st respondent ought to have ensured that the 2nd respondent complied with the procedure prescribed and explained the delay before entertaining the application for renewal.