GANESH Vs. K S T A T

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter coming up for preliminary hearing after notice and after hearing the Counsel for parties is disposed of by the following order.

(2.) The learned Government Pleader who had been directed to produce the records has produced the same and the same is perused.

(3.) The facts leading to this petition may be briefly stated and they are as follows: The Regional Transport Authority Mangalore, Dakshina Kannada (hereinafter referred to as the R.T.A.) at its meeting held on 19th May 1984 considered the representations and assessed the need for providing bus services on the route Kunjathbail to State Bank Via Kavoor, Kuloor, U. Stores, Lady-hill, Hampankatta and to fix the number of stage carriages under sub-section (3) of Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It was designated City Route No. 13B. At the meeting, after perusing the records, the R.T.A. came to the conclusion that on account of the traffic generated at Kunjathbail one of the termini on the route and having regard to the location of the Government Offices and factory of Mangalore Chemical and Fertilisers Ltd . and further having regard to the fact that only three direct buses were operating on the route in question decided to increase the number of buses by two more each one operating from one termini in the opposite direction making 10 round trips per bay. PurEucnt to that decision it invited applications from the intending stage carriage operators as per Gazette Notification No. RTA. BL. SCP 1/84-85 dated 15-6-1984 published in the Karnataka Gazette of June 28, 1984. In response to that application, as many as 1 applicants responded either applying for permits in either direction or both the directions. While those applications were panding consideration, some of the objectors preferred a revision petition before the Karnatake State Transport Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore (hereinafter refened to as the Tribunal), under Section 64-A of the Act inter alia contending that the determination was under Section 47(3) of the Act; not in accordance with law and that there was excessive fixation of the number of trips etc. That revision petition came to be allowed partly. The Tribunal while confirming the opening of the routes under sub-section (3) of Section 47 of the Act restricted the number of trips to 5 round trips per vehicle in each direction and further restricted the operation of those vehicles to meet the needs of the peak hour traffic only. Aggrieved by that decision of the Tribunal, one M. Viswanatha Devadiga preferred W.P. Nos. 20133 to 20135/1984 in this Court inter alia contending that the Tribunal ought not to have interfered with the number of trips determined by the R.T.A. while making the determination of the number of stage carriages in respect of which stage carriage permits may be granted on the routes in question under sub-section (3) of Section 47 of the Act. Those petitions came to be clubbed together with some other Writ Petitions which were filed by other stege carriage operators in respect of other routes determined similarly by the sama R.T.A , Dakshina Kannada. This Court having heard the arguments came to the conclusion that the number of trips on the several routes in question came to be determined by the R.T.A., Dakshina Kannada, on no material at all and therefore the RTA had acted with certain amount of material irregularity in not collecting the data in regard to the number of trips required to be made by the number of stage carriages determined for the routes in question. Therefore, this Court issued the following directions in the said Writ Petition :