ONKARAPPA Vs. REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY CHITRADURGA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a holder of a stage carriage permit No. 37a/59-60 for the route Bheemasamudra to Shimoga and back and Chitradurga to Rayanahalli and back was issued with a fresh permit No. 53/98-99. On the expiry of the period of permit, the petitioner's application for renewal was allowed, by resolution dated 5-7-2004 of the rta, Chitradurga. Aggrieved by the renewal, the 2nd respondent KSRTC filed Rev. Petition 612/2004 before the Karnataka State transport Appellate Tribunal, for short kstat, contending that the route in question overlaps the notified routes under the Schemes of Shimoga, Bellary and Bangalore was allowed by order dated 28th July, 2005 Annex-ure-B recording a finding that the RTA, despite the objections of the KSRTC, did not obtain a joint route survey to ascertain as to whether the route for which the renewal of permit was sought for, overlapped the notified route, while strangely recording findings that the route overlaps the notified route and that the petitioner was not a saved operator either under the Bangalore, Bellary or shimoga Pocket Schemes.

(2.) IN the case of Karnataka State Road transport Corporation v. Pauli Govis, ILR 1996 Karnataka 295 : (AIR 1996 Kant 247 ). this Court considered all important earlier pronouncements of the Apex Court as well as this court, having a bearing on its decision making and recorded its summary of findings which in the circumstances is apposite :

(3.) THAT for a proper exercise of its power under Section 80 of the Act, the authority concerned shall have to keep in view the provisions of Section 104 of the Act and make sure that the ground of permit by it is not in violation of any Scheme duly published under Section 100 (3);