M HANEEF Vs. K S T A T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Out of these writ petitions, writ petitions 4364 and 4365/85 are preferred by the applicants. The other writ petitions are preferred by the objectors The parties to all these writ petitions are common. Therefore, for the purpose of convenience in the order, the ranking assigned to the parties in Writ Petition Nos. 3928 and 3929/85 will be referred to.

(2.) Respondents 4 and 5 have filed the applications for grant of stage carriage permits on the routes-Birur to Pavagada and Pavagada to Birur. After complying with the procedural requirements, the 2nd respondent has granted both the applications by the resolution dated 16-5-1984 passed in Subject No. 73 and 74/83-84. Pursuant to the grant, the Secretary, R.T.A., has assigned the timings on 28-8-1984.

(3.) Some of the objectors have preferred appeals against the aforesaid grant of permits before the Karnataka State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'KASTAT') which has allowed the appeals and has set aside the permits and has remitted the matters to the 2nd respondent with a direction to consider the same afresh in accordance with the directions contained in the order of remand. While remitting the matter, the KSTAT has also permitted respondents 4 and 5 to operate the services as per the existing timings without making that circumstances as a ground /or grant of permit to both the respondents or either of them. The petitioners in the other writ petitions other than W.Ps. 4364 and 4365/85, are aggrieved with the aforesaid direction of the KSTAT permitting respondents 4 and 5 to operate the services during the pendency of the proceedings before the 2nd respondent. Whereas respondents 4 and 5 are aggrieved with the very order of remand. Therefore, in these petitions, the main argument is advanced by respondents 4 and 5 who are petitioners in Writ Petitions 4364 and 4365 of 1985.