B HSHANKAR SINGH Vs. PABDUL AZEEZ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of the Regional Transport Authority, Bellary (Respondent-2) made on 9-5-1962 granting a stage carriage permit to respondent-1 to operate between Bellary and Kampli Via Yemmiganur, Kurugodu and Kolur, has been challenged in these writ petitions preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, it is necessary to set out the material facts leading to the grant of the permit to respondent-1. On the invitation calling for applications for permit for trips between Bellary and Kampli, respondent 1 made an application. The first petitioner in W. P. 633/62 and the petitioner in W. P. 642 of 62, besides themselves applying for permits filed objections" to the grant of the permit to respondent-1. They also made applications for extension of their routes Bellary-Kurugod to Kampli. Those applications came to be considered by the second respondent, and an order was made on 18-2-1960 by which it found that there was need for granting a permit for four trips between Bellary and Kampli, and a permit was granted to respondent-1. The applications made by the first petitioner in W. P. 633/62 and the petitioner in W. P. 642/62 for extension of their routes and also their applications for independent permits for these routes were rejected. Against the grant of the permit to respondent-1, the petitioners preferred appeals to the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, which Tribunal confirmed the order made by the Regional Transport Authority. Aggrieved by that order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal, the petitioners preferred appeals to the Revenue Appellate Tribunal. The Revenue Appellate Tribunal set aside the order of the Regional Transport Authority holding that need for the service had not been established. The appeal preferred by the petitioners against the rejection of their applications on extension of their services was kept pending before the Revenue Appellate Tribunal. Against the order of the Revenue Appellate Tribunal allowing the appeal preferred by the petitioners, respondent No. 1 preferred Writ Petition No. 1051/61 in this Court. At the time of the hearing of the said writ petition, the parties came to an understanding and filed a memo setting out the terms of the compromise. Taking that memo into consideration and also the relevant material on record, this Court made an order on 28-11-61. It is necessary to set out the operative portion of the order which reads thus:

(3.) On the basis of the said order, respondent-1 obtained two permits for the route in question. At that time, Appeal No. 974/61 preferred by the petitioners was pending before the Revenue appellate Tribunal. Respondent-1 withdrew his objections to the extension prayed for by the petitioner and accordingly, the Revenue Appellate Tribunal, "by an order made on 1-5-62 directed the issue of permits granting extension to the petitioners in accordance with the order of the High Court. In the meantime, on 20-1-1982, respondent-1 applied to the Regional Transport Authority, Bellary for grant of a permit for two additional trip's between Bellary and Kampli via Kurugodu. That application, after compliance with the provisions of Section 57(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act, came up for hearing on 3-4-62. The petitioners objected to the grant of the permit to respondent-1. On 9-5-62, the Regional Transport Authority passed a, resolution" granting the permit to respondent-1. It is against the said order, the above writ petitions have teen preferred. W. P. 633/62 was filed in this "Court on 31-5-62 and it was admitted on 7-6-1962.